I am grateful for that clarification. I have never signed up to the concept of the tunnel uncritically or without reservations—or, indeed, at all—because I have always held open the option that there might be a better solution, and if that is what the right hon. Gentleman is saying, then we are on all fours with each other. That is why I have looked in some detail at proposals such as the ““Binnie Bubbler””, SUDS and the idea of separate rainwater and sewerage networks, which would also create the problem of huge disruption and much additional cost. Some of those projects, including water conservation, can be done and should be effective, both environmentally and from a cost perspective; the difficult thing is to find an alternative that does what the Thames tunnel would do.
Water Industry (Financial Assistance) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Andy Slaughter
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 14 March 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Water Industry (Financial Assistance) Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
542 c301 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 16:09:13 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_817529
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_817529
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_817529