CHANNEL TUNNEL.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 23 August 1924, Page 16

CHANNEL TUNNEL.

LIKELY TO RE BUILT. SCHEME TO COST £29,000.000. LONDON. July 2. To the deputation which waited upon him to urge upon the Government the desirableness of sanctioning the construction of the Channel 'tunnel,- the Prime Minister gave what may be described as a sympathetic reply. He told the deputation of the House of Commons Tunnel Committee, represent, ing ail parties and backed by 4.00 members of Parliament, that he had summoned a special meeting of the Committee of Imperial Defence for an early date to consider the matter. Everyone must admit, he said, that circumstances had changed Very much in reference to questions of strategy within the last few years. That was one of the considerations which- were essential to a settlement of this question when deciding whether the project was a good or a bad project. Eor instance, the development of air-power was a factor which would now have to be taken into consideration. It was also essential that the very best feeling should be maintained between France and ourselves, so that in deciding the question of the tunnel they would have to take into account its effect, direct or indirect, in promoting harmonious relations between France and ourselves. The whole question would have to he very carefully considered from a practical and detailed Vyrpoint of view. He proposed to take r the chair at the special sitting of the ' Committee of Imperial Defence in order to show what great importance the Government attached to the subject. He asked the Ministers concerned, the Service Ministers, to be present, so that they might hear what he had to say. He also asked all the ex-Premiers who had sat on the Committee of Imperial Defence, and who had views on the subject, specially' to attend the meeting. That was for two reasons: He wished to lift this question, as had been done so far very successfully, out of party politics. „ He also wished to get the best responsible advice from those who could speak with great authority on the subject. All the exPremiers had accepted the invitation. The meorandum which was submitted to the Prime Minister gives a brief history of the Channel Tunnel project, and a description of the experimental operations carried out from time to time. Should the scheme lve decided upon, one estimate given in the memorandum is that work would be provided for 24,000 men —12,00 p in England and 12,000 in France —for nearly five years. On the question of cost the memorandum states:

“Complete unanimity has existed between the British and French engineers entrusted with . responsibility in carrying out the work concerning all the details of construction, and they are equally agreed both as to the duration of the operations and as to the total expenditure involved. Reckoning from the tunnel-mouth in England to the tunnel-mouth in France, including all necessary outlay in respect of (1) the two interchange stations; (2) the drainage headings; and (3 1 ) incidental equipment. Sir P. Tempest and his French colleagues came to the conclusion that the scheme can in its entirety be completed at a total cost of £29,000,000. This amount exceeds by £13,000,000 the estimate prepared in 1917, the difference being entirely due to the enhanced cost of labour and \ tile large increase in the price of everv kind of material required for purposes f of construction on shore as also under sea. ”

In regard to raising the necessary capital, the memorandum declares that no difficulty need be anticipated on the point, assuming that definite support is given to the scheme by the British Government. At the outset, subscriptions would be invited for a small portion only of the sum mentioned, and the amount on either side of the Channel will be limited to £1,250,000. A definite assurance that the money would he forthcoming has been received from Baron Emile B. d’Erlanger, the chairman of the Chanenl- Tunnel Company, i who stated: “J do not believe that, if we had permission to build the tunnel, we should find any difficulty between the Southern Railway and other interested parties in raising the £1,250.000 required for the pilot and drainage tunnels, and there is not the slightest shadow of a doubt that the Northern Railway o! Fiance would put up the money necessary for building their portion. Once the pilot and drainage tunnels had been driven, and the absolute certainty of the practicability of the scheme demonstrated, the whole of the world, from America to China, would he only too eager to subscribe shares for building the traffic tunnels.”