MacGregor's Chunnel
Page 32
Page 33
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
BRITAIN has an enormous opportunity of growth ahead of it, British Steel Corporation chairman Ian MacGregor told conference delegates.
Mr MacGregor said it was not possible to meet low-cost competition from developing countries with a similar approach to steel manufacture, but it was possible to improve our performance by more efficient work practices.
He said inflation has robbed Britain of the ability to make capital investments in recent years, but we could expand the economy by self-financing schemes.
This was his lever to introduce delegates to his dream of the EuroRoute, the £3.8bn combined Channel tunnel/bridge road/rail route.
Cross-Channel traffic has grown dramatically, with Dover's lorry traffic alone going up by 19.48 per cent between 1981 and 1982. Passenger and cargo have grown at the same time, and EuroRoute will help restore Britain to a prominent position in Europe.
He described the project as "an idea whose time has con' and urged the next Governmt to give its eonsent to t scheme. It would create 50,C jobs during the five-year c( struction period.
In reply to a delegate's qui tion, Mr MacGregor said the i tial tolls would be substantia less than the charges made nt for using ferries, but once t construction costs were pi after 25 to 30 years, it would up to the British and French gc ernments to decide what, if al charges to make. noney costs that hauliers to pay out greater or less the true costs that economtry to identify?' Those le who argue that the 'true' are higher conveniently igthe fact that nobody tries to late the cost of the uned by-products, or 'bads' onomists' jargon, of many • industries such as steel, and railways."
oking at the subject from ler point of view, Dr Sharp :ified a number of ways in h outside forces, mostly ated by governments, cause ers' actual costs to be er than the "true" economic ;.
spoke of arbitrary maxiweight limits, reduced ng hours and speed limits then came to the controverissue of the government's tion policy. "According to official DTp figures, heavy as (over 3.5 tonnes gvw) will mponsible for 5.4 per cent of :otal mileage run on British s in 1983/84 and will pay per cent of the track costs, building, maintaining and :ing roads," he said.
went on to point out that .1 remarkable fact is that the capital costs of new road ling are charged against the Bnt annual tax revenue. This
course quite different from position in private industry n nationalised enterprises re it is not expected that all stment should be funded current revenue."
• Sharp said that he did not aye the DTp's claim that it got the tax revenue for 38 ie vehicles exactly equal to costs. "If ved levels are supposed to reflect road damage then the rates for 38 tonnes should be lower than those for 32.5 tonnes," he said.
Dr Sharp concluded his paper by again stressing the importance of public opinion and how it can "influence the taxes and regulations imposed on goods transport quite as much as economic analysis."
He had some powerful economic arguments for those who say that the heavier vehicles recommended by Armitage would cause our roads to distintegrate or our bridges to collapse.
"An equivalent sum to the rail subsidy for one year would be enough to pay for the strengthening or reconstruction of all weak bridges on trunk and principal roads and about half the weak bridges on major roads.
"One year's surplus tax revenue from all road users in Britain would pay for the replacement of all weak bridges on all the roads in the country four times over. A more efficient road haulage industry means cheaper goods and more jobs."