Conclusion
Texte intégral
1It is a pleasure for me to close the proceedings of the research and events programme devoted to the Cross-Channel fixed link. What is particularly interesting about this programme is that it brings together the different perspectives of historians, academics, undertakings and policymakers. The distinguished contributions made to the programme since 2014 have explored the significance of the Channel Tunnel in all of its facets. In particular, this Final Summit has endeavoured to look into the future of this infrastructure, made more uncertain by Brexit.
2The historic, political and economic significance of the Cross-Channel rail infrastructure cannot be overemphasized. I would like to briefly recap the elements that make the Cross-Channel link such a unique achievement in the perspective of European transport policy and actually European history.
3It is, perhaps, first of all, an astounding technological achievement. Although the technology is twenty years old, if we were to build another Channel tunnel today we would do it pretty much in the same way as we did then. At a time of fast-moving technological evolution, this is already very impressive.
4But the Tunnel is much more than just an engineering feat. It has been a pioneer, blazing a trail for the major rail infrastructure projects which have followed in its steps. For example, it was the first rail project of this magnitude to be entirely privately financed. The history of the Tunnel has taught important lessons, some of them painful, as regards the risks and rewards of such an endeavour.
5We have learned about the uncertainties and limitations of cost-benefit analyses looking far into the future, about how difficult it can be to correctly estimate the short-term evolution of demand and shifting mobility patterns. In particular, we have learned about the role of private investors and the role of the State in financing infrastructure.
6Despite the initial financial difficulties, the current success of the Tunnel as a business venture shows that major infrastructure projects can bring high long-term returns to investors.
7I am convinced that, building on the experience of the Tunnel, the public sector should do more to leverage the power of private enterprise in infrastructure building, not only by providing grants, but also by using innovating financial instruments, and by ensuring that short-term risks are kept manageable for investors.
8The hugely successful programme of infrastructure investments, the Connecting Europe Facility and European Investment Fund, shows that this approach brings results, in particular at times of scarce public resources.
9What I also find exciting about the cross-Channel link is its intermodal dimension, which is very modern. Transport Commissioner Violeta Bulc has declared 2018 the year of Multi-modality. The EU wants to promote combined transport. The Channel Tunnel was born intermodal already twenty years ago. Since its very beginning, Eurotunnel has been putting private cars and trucks on trains.
10This combination of Road and Rail as complementary, rather than just competing, modes of transport, bringing goods and people to the heart of urban centres with low environmental impact, deserves particular mention. It is the way to go in the future.
11Not least, I would like to mention the joint management of the security challenges posed by operations in the Tunnel. The critical nature of this infrastructure, and the threat of intrusion, will continue to require close cooperation between France and the UK.
12Finally, the Tunnel is also an example of joint governance of a binational infrastructure. It is remarkable how smooth operational cooperation between the French and the British sides of the Tunnel has been. Two regulatory bodies, each of them responsible for taking decisions on their national territory have found efficient solutions. The mechanisms for cooperation put in place in recent years have worked remarkably well.
13For the future, let us not forget the geopolitical significance of the Tunnel. The Tunnel has created a land border with France, the UK has to some extent ceased to be an island. For countries which were – more than once – divided by history and war, taking the momentous decision to create this permanent link was made possible by the emergence of a new mind-set, by a feeling of confidence that the neighbourly relationship between the UK and the rest of mainland Europe was there to stay. And it is my personal hope that this will continue to be the case also in the future.
Pour citer cet article
Référence papier
Elisabeth Werner, « Conclusion », Revue d’histoire des chemins de fer, 52 | 2019, 145-147.
Référence électronique
Elisabeth Werner, « Conclusion », Revue d’histoire des chemins de fer [En ligne], 52 | 2019, mis en ligne le 01 avril 2022, consulté le 15 juin 2025. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/rhcf/2653 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/rhcf.2653
Haut de pageDroits d’auteur
Le texte et les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés), sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.
Haut de page