THE waiting game for a decision on the proposed A3 tunnel could be soon be over, with the government expected to make an announcement in January.

If it is approved, work could begin in 2008, but this will only be if funding for the multi- million-pound project is found.

The news came at a debate in Westminster Hall initiated by South West Surrey MP Jeremy Hunt, who quizzed roads minister Stephen Ladyman over the scheme.

At the debate Mr Hunt, teamed with Portsmouth North MP Sarah McCarthy-Fry, pointed out the benefits of the tunnel scheme and urged the government to make a positive decision as soon as possible.

Mr Hunt said that the Hindhead area pays "a terrible price" because "it happens to sit right in the middle of that transport disaster zone". "The village of Hindhead, home to only 3,000 people, is sheared in half by the A3," he said.

"If one is on the wrong side, it is quicker to go to nearby Haslemere for one's shopping than to use the local shops.

"A huge amount of pollution is generated throughout the day by cars idling, slowing down, revving up and starting at the Hindhead lights.

"What I have said is fully supported and endorsed by my right honourable friend the member for North East Hampshire [James Arbuthnot].

"He is not present, but he speaks with great passion about the issues faced by his constituents, particularly in Grayshott, the town next door."

Meanwhile Mrs McCarthy-Fry argued at last Wednesday's debate for the huge economic benefits the tunnel would have for the Portsmouth area.

She pointed out that the city could develop its conferencing potential and boost its freight work at its port, with the tunnel bringing the opportunity for a regeneration - especially with the London Olympics on the horizon.

"My constituents hope that we will benefit from the huge tourism potential of our Naval heritage," she said.

"Unless we deal with the bottleneck at Hindhead, my area certainly will not reap the benefits of the national Olympics, because people will not want to come through it."

However, Dr Ladyman said that the opportunities for the south coast city did not take priority over the environmental and financial costs of the scheme.

"If a cost-effective, affordable and easy-to- provide solution were obvious, and if the environment were not a factor, I have no doubt that the road would be being built as we speak," he said. "Indeed, it would probably have been built many years ago.

"Unfortunately, however, the environment is an important factor and a cheap solution is not available.

"It is not just any part of the country that we can drive a dual carriageway through, which is why a tunnel scheme was identified as a potential way to deal with the problem.

"Environmental constraints have meant that we have spent 20 years searching for a solution to the problem."

Dr Ladyman also answered questions on why it has taken so long for a decision to be made over the scheme, with the inspector's report submitted to the government in August.

"Before a public inquiry statement is put in the public domain, it is normal for the secretary of state to make his or her views known," he said.

"Because this project is of such great importance there is not just one secretary of state who has to take a position on the inspector's report, but three: the Secretary of State for Transport, the Deputy Prime Minister because of his planning duties; and the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

"All three secretaries of state have to take a position before we can proceed further and they are in the process, with their officials, of working through the inspector's report.

"That will not be a very long time away, but it certainly will not be a matter of days - it is a complicated process."

The minister also explained that the announcement on whether the tunnel scheme has been approved is likely to coincide with a decision over its finding, should it go ahead.

He explained that the South East England Regional Assembly would have a significant part to play. It must decide if the scheme is a priority for the area after the government divided its budget geographically, and said the tunnel would not be funded from a national pot.

"The scheme that we are discussing was left with the region so that it could give us regional advice on it," he said.

"That advice is expected from the region early in January, and then a series of decisions will be made about which schemes we take forward. It is then that I would normally expect the inspector's report to be put in the public domain.

"The regional prioritisation of the scheme will be key to the speed at which it moves ahead."

Dr Ladyman said that should everything go to plan "it remains in the Highways Agency's targeted programme of improvements as a scheme for construction after 2007/08".

"However, I repeat the caveat that this is subject to the funding being available, and to the inspector's report not identifying a show- stopper," he added.