QUEENSBURY Tunnel campaigners who want to see the historic structure safeguarded for future generations have hit out after a Minister waded into the debate.

It comes as they await the findings of two Government-funded studies - due at the end of this month - into technical options for repairing the tunnel, and the feasibility of developing a Bradford-Halifax Greenway incorporating the 1.4-mile long passageway.

The latest development relates to pumping equipment on land at the Halifax end, installed to allow the removal of groundwater which collects inside the tunnel.

Campaigners say Highways England was obliged to provide the landowner with annual progress reports on works in the tunnel and pay £50 per year in rent, but never fulfilled either of those requirements. This meant the lease was forfeited in December 2017. 

The landowner - who supports the tunnel campaign - turned off the equipment in September 2018. The Queensbury Tunnel Society says this was done when “contractors made clear their intention to begin £545K of preparatory works for the tunnel’s abandonment without any formal agreement in place to ensure the continued operation of the pumps”.

They have now raised concern about a letter sent to Philip Davies, Conservative MP for Shipley, last week from Baroness Vere of Norbiton, the Minister for Roads, Buses and Places, which claimed that “it is entirely within [the landowner’s] gift to completely de-water the tunnel and do so without conditions”.  

It added: “This would allow inspections and works to be completed over the full length of the tunnel which would in turn inform the current studies and support the landowner’s professed desire to see the tunnel reopened.”

Campaigners say landowner David Sunderland has made two offers, the latest on March 11, to facilitate the tunnel’s de-watering, but was rejected. Mr Sunderland claims he has never been informed, or told why, and questioned why he was being criticised for not restarting the pumps, which he says he cannot do that without permission and won’t do without a legal agreement in place.

He said the only real condition he has mentioned is that the works must not prejudice the tunnel’s reopening and he wants a “clear written commitment  from Highways England and the Department for Transport (DfT) that they wouldn’t use de-watering as a chance to destroy the community’s hopes for the tunnel once and for all”.

A Highways England spokesperson said the structure is flooded and needs to be strengthened to prevent an uncontrolled collapse, which they say is the “best option for keeping this tunnel feasible”. 

The spokesperson added: “We have no legal involvement with the adjacent landowners. We don’t own the tunnel, and our remit is purely to maintain its safety and integrity.”

On March 23, the DfT, which owns the tunnel, deemed the landowner’s offer ‘unacceptable’ as it cannot undertake works prescribed by a third-party which has no legal, safety or management responsibility for the tunnel.

They said liability for tunnel collapse sits with the Secretary of State and QTS/the landowner would not be able to give an unlimited indemnity in the event of a shaft/tunnel collapse, owing to the works which QTS/the landowner prescribe proving to be insufficient.

They also said Highways England has a responsibility for their own staff and contractors, which cannot be outsourced, and would need to be able to undertake the stabilising works without the threat of the pump being turned off at any moment. The DfT said, to date, the stabilisation works undertaken do not serve to prevent the tunnel from being re-opened in the future, and public safety is the “top priority”.