My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
[The Question was as follows:
To ask Her Majesty's Government when they expect that the feasibility study on the proposed Channel Tunnel will be completed.]
My Lords, we expect the present phase of studies into the Channel Tunnel project to be completed in the first half of next year. In the light of this work and of the financial negotiations now in hand with the French Government and the private interests with whom we are pursuing the project, decisions will be taken on the scope and timing of further studies and works remaining to be carried out before a final decision on the project can be made.
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that Answer. May I ask whether, in deciding whether or not to go ahead with the Channel Tunnel, consideration will be given to the other forms of transport which could be available for cross-Channel use in the 1980s? Secondly, may I ask if the opinions of essential users have been sought about whether or not they would be prepared to travel in a train in a tunnel rather than use other traditional forms of oversea transport?
My Lords, with regard to my noble friend's first supplementary question, I do not think this point is being considered at the moment, because, as was published in the earlier papers, the other forms of transport were considered unsafe —a bridge for navigational reasons and roads because of fumes and for economic reasons. As regards the point about the users, that forms part of the present study.
My Lords, may I ask the noble Lord how long, in the opinion of the Government, it will take to build the tunnel once authorisation is given? Secondly, do the Government totally exclude the possibility of constructing, not a tunnel but a "bridge-tunnel-bridge" on the lines of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge which is already in operation?
My Lords, results of the present studies are not expected before the first half of next year. We should hope to reach a decision by 1973. If the go-ahead were given, it is hoped that the Tunnel could be in use some time in 1978 or 1979. I am not quite sure whether I understand the noble Lord's second supplementary question about a tunnel bridge. I take it he means a tube tunnel laid on the surface of the sea.
No, my Lords. The suggestion is that it should be a bridge which would go down to an artificial island, continue in great submerged tubes to another island and then go up again as a bridge to the other cliff. It is perfectly possible, my Lords. It has been done in Chesapeake Bay. It is a feasible proposition.
My Lords, I am advised that this would give rise to navigational hazards; also I am told that other maritime nations would have to be consulted before this could be done.
My Lords, would not the noble Lord agree that consideration of this project has been going on for quite a long time? What can be done to speed up the study which has been taking place since the project was first introduced, a project which many people in both Houses gave credence to because they thought that it would be of great value to this country and to France?
My Lords, I take the noble Lord's point. The earlier studies are now out of date and more geological surveying is needed. Present studies will, we hope, be complete by the first half of 1972.