Rail freight link to take 10,000 lorries a day off roads
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.A £10bn rail link, aimed at taking 10,000 lorries a day off Britain's congested motorways is expected to be approved by the Department of Transport.
Plans for the privately funded freight link between the north of England and the Channel Tunnel, which could also include new express passenger services, are understood to have been endorsed by the Transport minister, John Spellar. The 430-mile Central Railway route would relieve the M1, M6, M25, M20 and other motorways of some five million lorry journeys a year, its backers claim.
Most of the link follows the route of existing railways or disused tracks, thus minimising disruption during both its construction and operational phase. Its most attractive element for ministers, however, is that it will not involve any taxpayers' money and will counter allegations that the Government has reneged on its promise to create an integrated transport network. The trains will take lorry trailers from a series of depots to the Channel Tunnel, where they will join the existing shuttle service.
Backers of the project say there would also be sufficient capacity on the line for more traditional freight trains and t he possibility of linking the route to passenger services. As part of the infrastructure, engineers would need to reopen the Woodhead Tunnel between Sheffield and Manchester, which could also be used for the new Transpennine passenger franchise.
The line – extending from Liverpool through the Warrington and Sheffield areas, down to west London – could also provide passenger services between Waterloo and Heathrow. At the moment the only direct "overground" rail services from London to Heathrow run from Paddington. A short extension to the Central Railway could also be built at Rugby so travellers on the west coast main line from the North and Scotland could switch to trains to take them direct to the west London airport.
Central Railway would extend beyond the French side of the tunnel to Lille and has attracted the support of the French government. Principal partners in the scheme are the multinational engineering and management company Parsons and the French national railway SNCF.
The project in the UK will require a "hybrid" Bill, which is expected to be presented to Parliament in the autumn with the aim of beginning construction in 2005 and completing the work in 2010. It has won the support of a range of organisations, including freight groups, local authorities, unions and regional assemblies. Andrew Gritten, chairman of Central Railway, said: "The main benefit of the project will be the enormous number of lorries taken off the road between Britain and France. There are also potential benefits for passenger services. A big plus for the Government is that the scheme will not require any taxpayer's money."
A spokesman for the Strategic Rail Authority, which has reassessed its initial fierce opposition to the project, said that a decision on the proposals was imminent.
Agreement on the project was reached after Mr Spellar ordered a meeting to be arranged between the SRA and the developers to resolve the differences. The authority had protested that hundreds of platforms, bridges and tunnels would have to be altered to accommodate the continental-style goods trains, which are taller and wider than their British equivalent.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments