Basic HTML Version
PAGE 10
PASTOR GENERAL'S REPORT, FEBRUARY 1, 1985
serious about its commitment to a "real Common Market." It thus acquires
strong political symbolism. In addition, both the British and the French
governments now hold a similar crucial viewpoint--that the project should
be built with private capital and that the major role of both governments
should be not to guarantee private risk capital but to issue a commitment
that the project, once launched, would not be stopped for political rea
sons. The French were left hanging when Britain's Labour government, in
1975, cancelled the most recent project (there had been several previous
attempts). Digging had already progressed a mile and a half at both the
British and French entrances.
The idea of private financing for the "Chunnel" has acquired new favor ever
since the British government decided to sell off shares in publicly-owned
British Telecom. Even the government was surprised how avid British inves
tors were to gobble up the stock issue. A January 16 TIMES of London edito
rial entitled "A New Link for Europe" praised the "positive enthusiasm" for
a new tunnel attempt:
The atmosphere surrounding that venerable project has unquestion
ably changed in the last few months. For the first time, or cer
tainly the first time in many years, the idea has captured the
imagination and earned the positive enthusiasm of the British
prime minister•••• [Late last spring Mrs. Thatcher announced ] in
a joint declaration with President Mitterrand, that she recog
nized "the potential importance of a cross-Channel fixed link as
an element in the great European transport network," and con
sidered "that such a link would be technically feasible and fi
nancially viable." Thus the question is .!!2 longer "whether" but
"how."
What has changed? In one sense nothing, or nothing in the Brit
ish attitude.
The British position has been, ever since Mr.
Crosland stopped the digging ten years ago, that the tunnel must
not come at the taxpayer's expense.
It is the French, long
scornful of this attitude, who have come round. La rigueur is
the order of the day now for government spending, even more in
Paris than in London. The guarantees now being offered are po
litical--government will not cause investors to lose their money
by taking action to scupper the project--rather than financial.
The private investor is being asked to put up his own money at his
own risk. But, and this is a crucial difference, he is being
asked--or he is going to be....
�
A number of factors have come together to produce this change.
The solution of Britain's budget problem in the Community has
made Europe in general and M. Mitterrand in particular seem sud
denly more attractive. The emphasis 2!! creating� "real common
market" J2.y removing obstacles !.Q trade endows the idea of a di
rect link to the continent, without the hassle of unloading and
reloading or the danger of interruption by gales and fog, with an
obvious relevance.
The persistence of high unemployment [has] •••undeniably also lent
a certain lustre to a project variously estimated as likely to
provide fifty or even a hundred thousand j obs in the late 1980s,
especially if Tt reall y does not have to be financed out of the
public sector borrowing requirements•.••