The Channel Tunnel

UNESCO Courier, March, 1986 by John Ardagh

The Channel Tunnel

THE Channel Tunnel between Britain and France, a dream nearly two centuries old, is to become reality at last. And this is most warmly to be welcomed by all those who care for the future of Europe, for in all kinds of ways--economic, touristic, political, even psychological--it will serve to strengthen Britain's links with the Continent, and especially with France. Thus it will strike a blow at that old insularity which has shrouded the island of Britain for so long. We shall be islanders no more.

The joint decision to build the Tunnel was announced by President Francois Mitterrand and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in a ceremony at Lille on 21 January. The project chosen from among several contenders is for a twin-bore railway tunnel. This is what the French wanted, for express railways are France's forte. The British might have preferred a combined road and rail tunnel, but this would have been more costly. However, it has been agreed that a separate road tunnel might be added some time after the year 2000. In the meantime, so long as the two parliaments ratify the plan, digging will begin next year on a fifty-one-kilometre tunnel from a point near Folkestone, in Kent, to a point near Calais. British and French banks are providing the main part of the budget, which will be at least 2.3 [pounds sterling] billion.

When the Tunnel opens, in 1933, it will be able to carry up thirty million passengers a year. Fast trains will link London with Paris (some 450 km) in just over three hours, and London with Brussels in even less time. And a rail shuttle service will carry freight trucks and private cars between terminals at either end of the tunnel, with trains leaving every three minutes at peak periods.

It was a French engineer in 1802 who first proposed a tunnel under the English Channel: Napoleon was interested, for he thought it might assist his planned invasion of England. In the 1880s the scheme was revived, and private companies began to bore pilot tunnels; but the British Government took fright, mainly for defence reasons, and the project was stopped. Not until the 1950s did it surface again, and after much discussion new preliminary diggins began in 1974. But again the British Government cancelled the scheme (in 1975), this time for economic reasons.

Throughout that long period, the French showed noticeably more enthusiasm for a Channel tunnel than the British. This may seem curious, seeing that France already has many land frontiers, whereas for Britain a tunnel would be its first fixed link with the Continent, and thus more valuable. But the British were held back by their insularity, and especially by fears that an invader might be able to make use of the scheme. Happily, all that is past. Today Britain's politicians and business circles have shown themselves as eager as the French.

It is true that ordinary British public opinion remains sceptical. Some people point out that the train shuttle for cars will take almost the same time as the hovercraft service (thirty-five minutes) and will be only forty minutes faster than the present ferry crossings: these critics wonder whether enough people will use the tunnel to amortize its huge costs. The inhabitants of the Dover and Folkestone areas are alarmed for their environment, and for the future of jobs with the ferry services. And many experts predict that in economic terms the tunnel will benefit France more than Britain if, as they believe, the new industry attracted to its vicinity opts less for prosperous Kent than for the struggling Nord-Pas de Calais region with its wider spaces, lower costs and more central position in the European Economic Community.

However, those who take a wider and longer-term view believe that these possible drawbacks for Britain will be far outweighed by the advantages. Passengers by express train will be able to do the journey at least an hour faster than by air, city centre to city centre, and without any tedious waits at airports. Also the fares will be cheaper. So the tunnel will probably stimulate a vast increase in tourism and business travel between London and Paris and Brussels, much of it in the form of day excursions. It will also encourage new export trade by train and truck, and it will help to build the Kent and Pas-de-Calais areas into a vital nerve-centre of the European Economic Community, buzzing with new modern industry. Above all, as Mrs Thatcher has said, the tunnel venture is a symbol of Britain's involvement in Europe and of its close ties with France. In my own view, it will strengthen the exchanges between peoples and thus lead to better understanding, for it is ignorance that breeds prejudice and chauvinism.