Policy Review Section

Abstract

In this Policy Review Section, Ian Holliday and Roger Vickerman of the University of Kent examine the regional impact of the Channel Tunnel in the context of the different political and administrative systems prevailing within Britain and France. Eurotunnel, the company which is licensed by the French and British governments to build and operate the Tunnel, has no government finance or guarantees and hence the public authorities have no direct control over its commercial development. However, in both countries central and local government has, to varying degrees, sought to influence the short and longer term regional consequences. In terms of the former, the £4 billion construction project is seen as an opportunity in France to concentrate the benefits in the immediate hinterland of the Tunnel in Nord-Pas de Calais through public and private sector partnership schemes whereas in Britain public policy has sought to diffuse the benefits across the economy as a whole and particularly to industry in more depressed regions, mainly through publicizing contract opportunities. The evidence suggests that the dispersal strategy, particularly in the context of a less interventionist policy framework in the UK, has proved more difficult to achieve. Turning to the longer term implications, Holliday and Vickerman argue that the institution of a Single European Market allied with the Channel Tunnel, the development of a north-European high speed train network and new motorway connections will reinforce the dominance of the so-called ‘golden triangle’ bounded by London, Köln/Frankfurt and Paris. Cities within this zone such as Lille which will be connected to the high speed train network and will have associated commercial and infrastructure investments are forecast to benefit considerably, whilst the cities which may experience negative economic consequences are seen as being mainly in Britain outside South East England. Such areas face a double disadvantage: they are increasingly peripheral to the north-west European economy; and there are no clear plans in the UK to link them properly to the new transport systems which will structure that economy. In regard to public policy, Holliday and Vickerman contrast the position in France where most infrastructure investment has been agreed and the main questions concern ways of deriving maximum benefit from it, whereas in Britain the debate remains about whether additional investment is required and, if so, how it should be financed. They conclude that public policy in Britain requires far more imagination than is the case in France because of the more difficult regional problems posed by the Tunnel and that the absence of such a strategic approach to guide public and private investment is likely to reinforce the North-South divide.