construction workers, especially those with specific skills are traditionally very
mobile and would not necessarily be local. Nevertheless, it was recognised that there
would be significant laying-off of skilled and unskilled manual workers with the
completion of the Tunnel and it was thought there would be a need for training
programmes, advice and counselling for redeployment of these workers.
3.2.2 Transport operations
The Tunnel was expected to have a considerable effect on the cross Channel market.
The KIS predicted that the Tunnel would increase the size of total market by creating
new traffic and offer an additional alternative mode rather than being just replacing
the ferries as in other fixed link projects. Following initial losses, ferry traffic was
projected to continue to increase as the market increased. Employment would not
however follow the same path as the ferries would need to reduce the considerable
overmanning in order to be able to compete, such that the initial large losses would be
followed by only modest recovery of ferry-related employment.
Initial projections of future passenger traffic were for passenger numbers for the
tunnel at 29.1 million and 39.5 million for 1993 and 2003 respectively, out of a total
passenger market of 64.3 million and 88.1 million for each year. The impact on
freight traffic was expected to be much less than on passenger traffic, with the tunnel
taking 14.8 million tonnes in 1993 and 21.1. million tonnes in 2003 out of a total
market of 84.4 and 122.6 million tonnes respectively.
Early forecasts recognised that the size of the short-sea market would depend on the
pricing strategies adopted by the tunnel and the ferries. Only with significant price
cutting form the fare levels realised before the tunnel would the market be able to
grow significantly enough to provide sufficient traffic for both sets of operators. This
would seriously reduce yields and lead to longer term problems: a reduction in the
number of ferry operators and problems for Eurotunnel in servicing its debt. The
reduction in ferry services would lead to a concentration in services on a single port,
Dover, although some of the smaller ports were thought to be able to continue to
compete in niche markets such as longer sea routes to more distant continental ports,
unaccompanied freight etc.
The estimated loss in ferry related employment was initially predicted to be in the
range of 6,660 and 4,300 by 1993 and (following traffic growth) 6,600 to 4,100 by
2003. This was later revised upwards to nearly 7500 jobs in the period 1991-1994
alone. The Tunnel clearly needs far lower employment levels to deal with the same
volume of traffic and employment in Kent was forecast to be around 3,250 in 1993
and 3,800 by 2003.
3.2.3 Enterprises in other sectors
The KIS identified a number of sectors that would be principally affected by the
existence of the Channel Tunnel and associated infrastructure within Kent: tourism,
retailing, manufacturing, wholesalers and road haulage. The Tunnel was expected to
promote growth in these sectors in Kent for varying reasons and to generate additional
indirect and induced employment within the county. The KIS predicted a secondary
employment effect of 13,000 -14,000 jobs by 1995 in Kent.