In its State of Conservation report to UNESCO the big question, how would Britain wriggle out of UNESCO’s opinion that the short tunnel was too short, has been answered. It seems that a longer tunnel isn’t  “viable”. Wow, but what does that mean? Highways England says it had already explained what it means but not clearly enough so now it has had another go: 

“although the evidence that had been submitted to the 2017 Advisory mission was extensive, the reasons why these particular routes were not deliverable had not been clearly articulated. Further work has been undertaken by Highways England to better collate the evidence and set out more clearly the reasons why neither the F10 southern bypass nor the longer tunnel option are deliverable.”

Are you on tenterhooks? What is the clearly articulated reason Highways England has revealed for saying a longer tunnel isn’t deliverable? What is the further evidence it has collated?  Please read it. It’s simple. It’s the MONEY, and they say so very clearly. Britain is unwilling to spend little more than it has bribed the DUP with to deliver a non-damaging solution for the World Heritage landscape at Stonehenge!