Tunnel vision: the private sector has the ability to transform British infrastructure
Last week came an unsurprising denouement: the proposed link between Scotland and Northern Ireland, via a bridge or a tunnel, was being shelved. The Treasury could not countenance the estimated £15 billion cost.
This was a project with Boris Johnson’s name all over it: big, bold, innovative and eye-catching. It would be a solid piece of legacy if it outdid the infamous Garden Bridge in London and actually came to fruition.
Connecting the islands of Britain and Ireland was not simply a flight of Johnsonian fancy, a half-baked thought accidentally mistaken as serious policy. In 2018, the SNP’s jack of all trades, Mike Russell endorsed the idea, and Irish foreign minister, Simon Coveney, had called for a feasibility study. Northern Ireland local authorities were next, and the then-first minister, Arlene Foster, noted that there was growing support.
The idea of a bridge is not purely in the realms of fantasy. As former Irish taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, pointed out there is a bridge linking Denmark and Sweden. There is also the Seikan Tunnel between the Japanese islands of Hokkaido and Honshu – even longer than the proposal for a link between Northern Ireland and Scotland.
In the public mind the notion of it became absurd. Too quickly, it was written off, and became a casualty of Treasury belt-tightening.
We should mourn this lack of ambition. A bridge or tunnel between Scotland and Northern Ireland would be a major boost to the UK’s infrastructure. It is one of the most popular future projects among hauliers, has the support of the rail industry, and in terms of strengthening the Union would transform accessibility to Northern Ireland from Great Britain, currently reliant on air or ferry. Experts agree it is technically feasible, one group of engineers believe a tunnel from south-west Scotland to the coast of Northern Ireland is not even especially difficult.
We all know the finances are in a weakened state, and £15bn or £20bn, or whatever the final figure might be for a huge infrastructure project is a heavy burden for the Treasury to bear. How disheartening that the reaction to an absence of public money is to shrug our shoulders and file the idea as impossible.
If, as one study suggested, the economic benefit of a bridge or tunnel would be measured in hundreds of millions of pounds each year, then it has the potential for profitability. The Channel Tunnel was built largely through private finance as a build-own-operate-transfer (BOOT) scheme. The Øresund Connection, linking Denmark and Sweden, was designed to be entirely user-financed, with public money spent only on the land connections.
Where are the companies itching to finance a great infrastructure project? With the extension of high-speed rail on the horizon, aviation grappling with its environmental impact, and a renewed focus on trading links with our close neighbours, what better time to transform connectivity between our two islands?
This is an opportunity to go down in history. It needs not only financial acumen and business savvy, but it also requires imagination and boldness. British engineers used to be legendary for this kind of flair and ambition—surely the flame still burns?