Channel link forum
Page 7
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
AT A Transport Forum held in London last Friday and sponsored by Commercial Motor, Professor Christopher Foster (a management consultant with Coopers and Lybrand Associates Ltd) explained the thinking behind the Channel Link Report to 20 representatives of the industry.
Concern was expressed that the Link was biased in favour of rail and it was suggested that unless the project could be funded entirely by private means, it should be abandoned.
In answer to fears of serious abstraction of traffic from road to rail, Professor Foster said that any such abstraction would be minimal and pointed out environmental advantages. He said the concept included dividing costs and benefits between those EEC countries concerned.
The four options which were considered were a single-track ryil scheme costing £600m at
1979, prices, a double-track scheme with a road capability costing £1,300m, a road bridge at £2,400m, and a road bridge and tunnel at £3,000m.
Professor Foster pointed out that several merchant banks were beginning to examine the question of funding and interest has also been shown by the clearing banks.
He said that despite Britain's withdrawal from the scheme earlier — which had upset French interests — there was a firm body of opinion in many quarters in favour of the Link which, he anticipated, would be made in 1981.