House of Commons Hansard Debates for 13 May 1992

Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Pollution

11. Mr. McFall : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment if Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution will retain its present responsibilities of environmental inspection.

Mr. Maclean : We intend that Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution should become part of the proposed new environment agency. Meanwhile, Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution will continue its excellent work of protecting our environment.

Mr. McFall : In the light of the report by the Environment Select Committee--and, indeed, the forthcoming Rio summit--it is dismaying to note that the Government have ratted on their promise to propose, in the Queen's Speech, a unified agency to deal with atmospheric and aqueous pollution. That appears even more squalid when we find that it is the result of an interdepartmental fight : the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food is currently taking some of the powers of the National Rivers Authority.

Does the Minister agree that he can learn something from the position in Scotland, where a unified pollution agency has been set up? An away-day ticket to Glasgow or Edinburgh would help him to realise that such an agency is worth going for.

Mr. Maclean : I find that rather pathetic. I thought that by now the Labour party would have learnt not to believe press tittle-tattle--unless, of course, it is seeking to divert attention from the genuine rows on its Front Bench. The

Column 614

Government have not proposed changes in DOE- MAFF responsibilities, and we shall shortly announce the structure of the new environment agency.

Mr. Adley : As part of his duties, will my hon. Friend please study the report of the Committee stage of the Environmental Protection Act 1989? Will he note particularly the plight of my constituents Mr. and Mrs. Spencer and their neighbours, who live in Fairfield, Christchurch and who for years have had to suffer the indignity of living under a Ready Mixed Concrete plant, which showers their properties with dust?

Is my hon. Friend aware that his predecessor, Mr. Trippier--to whom he rightly paid tribute--sought to allay my fears, saying that the Environmental Protection Act would deal with the problem? It has not done so. When my hon. Friend has read the report of the Committee stage, will he agree to visit my constituency, and attend a meeting with the local authority, Fairfield residents and me, so that we can see what can be done to alleviate the residents' plight ?

Mr. Maclean : I shall certainly read the report of the Committee stage, and I shall certainly call for the file on the problem identified by my hon. Friend. I should have thought that our system of integrated pollution control--we are working through all the major polluters in the country, including limestone, cement and mineral works--would soon bring the problem within the scope of integrated pollution control requirements, and do a good deal to minimise it. I will study the file, however, and I look forward to a discussion with my hon. Friend.

Mr. Simon Hughes : Will the Minister give an undertaking that, until the arrival of the much-delayed day on which the Government legislate for an environmental protection agency, increased resources will be provided for Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution as an interim measure? Last October, in the Department's own ministerial information system--MINIS-- report, Mr. John Hobson, the head of pollution control, said that unless substantially increased resources were provided within the next three years, it was inevitable that something fundamental would give.

Mr. Maclean : I do not think that the hon. Gentleman should exaggerate. We have made it clear that the creation of the environment agency remains a high priority, and drafting of the Bill will proceed so that we can take advantage of the earliest possible legislative opportunity.

As for resources for HMIP, I am delighted to tell the House that the number of staff in post has doubled over the past few years. We shall continue to ensure that the inspectorate has all the staff and resources that it needs to carry on its excellent work in protecting our environment.

Mr. Nigel Evans : Is my hon. Friend aware of the concern felt by residents in my constituency, Ribble Valley, about the possibility of the burning of orimulsion and the consequent increased discharges of sulphur over the villages of Read and Simonstone? That concern is shared by me, and by the local authority, and the matter is currently being considered by HMIP.

Mr. Maclean : Yes, I am aware of those concerns. I know that HMIP is considering them at the moment. I assure my hon. Friend that all due care and consideration will be given, and, if permission is granted, there will be

Column 615

suitable discharge consents and detailed restrictions so that, in all circumstances, people living nearby are protected.

Mrs. Ann Taylor : Can the Minister say why the commitment to an environmental protection agency was absent from the Queen's Speech? After all, it was the Prime Minister who pledged that there would be early legislation to that effect. If the reason for its absence is not that the Secretary of State cannot withstand the pressure from the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, is it because the Secretary of State himself does not have a sufficient commitment to an environmental protection agency? Either way, does not that prove that environmental protection will continue to be given a low priority by this Government, who are totally complacent and do not understand the urgency and the severity of the threat to our environment?

Mr. Maclean : I think that the hon. Lady will, perhaps, have cause to regret those words. As I have said, the creation of the new environmental protection agency remains a high priority and we are pushing on with the drafting of a Bill so that we can take advantage of the earliest legislative opportunity.

One reason the Labour party was not believed and not elected was that every single one of its manifesto commitments was a top priority to be implemented apparently within two days of the election. The public have seen through that sham and they believe us. There will be an environmental protection agency, it will work and we shall get the credit for it.

Local Government

13. Mr. Oppenheim : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what plans he has to speed up progress towards unitary local authorities ; and if he will make a statement.

17. Mrs. Currie : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will make a statement on the progress of the local government commission.

Mr. Howard : We shall set up the local government commission this summer to begin its task of reviewing local government structure in the shire counties, area by area. In each area it reviews, the commission will consider whether a unitary structure would better reflect the identities and interests of local communities and secure effective and convenient local government.

Mr. Oppenheim : May I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for that reply? Is he aware that many people consider that having two major overlapping tiers of local government can lead to waste and duplication? Will he, therefore, send the commission to Derbyshire as soon as possible where it will find a surprising degree of agreement across all parties, with the single exception of the ruling Labour group on the county council, that Derbyshire should move to being a unitary local authority, based on the existing borough, district and city council boundaries as soon as possible?

Mr. Howard : I am certainly aware that the view expressed by my hon. Friend is very widely shared. I expect, as a result of the commission's activities, that there will be a substantial increase in the number of unitary

Column 616

authorities in this country. I hope to make an announcement about the programme of areas for review before the summer recess.

Mrs. Currie : Is the Secretary of State aware that his lovely, cuddly new Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State wrote to me yesterday stating that areas where there is a history of dissatisfaction with the existing structure will need to be high on the list of areas for review. Does the Secretary of State accept that the word "dissatisfaction" is the understatement of the year with regard to Derbyshire county council? Can I put some fire into his belly and ask him to put a match to our county council so that we have decent local authorities in Derbyshire in future?

Mr. Howard : I am pleased to tell my hon. Friend that the phrase that she used is yet another aspect of Government policy with which the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State agrees. We shall certainly look very hard at the programme which I shall be announcing before long. I have no doubt that when the commission comes to consider Derbyshire, my hon. Friend will, in her quite inimitable way, put her views about the future of local government in the county to the commission.

Mr. Ashton : Will the Minister have the integrity to do what is best for local government or will he take notice of the two idiots from Derbyshire who want to carve things up again in a political way? Can we at least have a proper appeals body to consider disputes? Will the Secretary of State insist that there will be proper minimum size for the unitary authorities? Will he have that type of influence, or will we have the same old type of gerrymandering carve-up that we saw in the past?

Mr. Howard : We have never had gerrymandering carve-ups in the past. The independent commission will set about its task with complete integrity and it will make recommendations to me. I shall then decide on the recommendations that it makes and place them before the House for approval.

Mr. Barnes : The hon. Members for Amber Valley (Mr. Oppenheim) and for Derbyshire, South (Mrs. Currie) have an unhealthy and unwarranted obsession about Derbyshire county council. The only way to get rid of that obsession is for them to try to get rid of the county council. The hon. Member for Amber Valley produced a Bill in the last Parliament to do exactly that. Can we ensure that Derbyshire county council and the districts in Derbyshire are fully consulted about their fate and about what the unitary authority areas will be?

Mr. Howard : It is much more than consultation. The authorities in Derbyshire will be able to put their views directly to the local government commission as will the hon. Gentleman and hon. Members. I note that the views expressed by my hon. Friends about that and a range of other matters seem to have found a good deal of approval from their constituents at the recent general election.

Mr. Channon : When the commission has finished with Derbyshire, can my right hon. and learned Friend ensure that it then moves speedily on to Essex because there is great unanimity of view in my constituency and, I suspect, in a number of ex-county boroughs all over the country, that the best form of local government that we have had

Column 617

for many years was the county borough system? The sooner we return to a similar system, the better for all concerned.

Mr. Howard : I shall do my best to accommodate my right hon. Friend's views, but he will understand that the commission will be unable to look at every area at once. I shall consider carefully the views expressed by my right hon. and hon. Friends when I draw up the programme of work for the commission, which I hope to announce soon.

Mr. William O'Brien : Does the Secretary of State agree with the Association of District Councils that the programme set by the commission to report over five years is much too long? In view of the concerns expressed by his colleagues, does he agree that the number of people serving on the commission, which is now set at between five and 15, is totally inadequate? Will he agree to increase the number so that the commission can report over a two-year rather than a five-year period? That is in the best interests of local government, the people receiving the service, and the people who work in it. Can we have the process speeded up by increasing the number of people serving on the commission?

Mr. Howard : No, I do not think that the task should be rushed. It is impractical to suggest that the whole of the country could be considered in two years. Naturally, I want the commission to proceed speedily, but it must do a proper and thorough job and that will take a certain amount of time.

Mr. Barry Field : May I treat my right hon. and learned Friend to a rendition of an Isle of Wight song : 43 county councillors, 64 borough councillors, 29 parish and town councillors and more mayors than Toytown. And a local government boundary commission recommendation that we should have a unitary authority. Can we please be near the top of the list?

Mr. Howard : I note what my hon. Friend says. He has made his views clear to me on a number of occasions, including when I visited his constituency during the general election campaign. I shall take his concerns fully into account in preparing the programme for the commission.

Column 618

Urban Regeneration Agency

14. Mr. Wicks : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how the proposed urban regeneration agency will be accountable to Parliament.

16. Mr. Gunnell : To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment how the proposed urban regeneration agency will be accountable to Parliament.

Mr. Howard : The urban regeneration agency will be a sponsored body working under my guidance and reporting direct to me. I shall be accountable to Parliament for its actions.

Mr. Wicks : Is not that new quango simply a further attempt to marginalise local authorities? Is not the lesson from the history of 25 years of initiatives and schemes to tackle inner city problems that we need local authorities and local communities to represent their views rather than top-down approaches from London? Surely it is time for the Government to set aside their excitable attacks on local government and to show wisdom on one of the biggest issues facing the nation in the 1990s?

Mr. Howard : From what we have seen, in recent years local authorities have been increasingly queuing up for action from London, which is the opposite of the position described by the hon. Member for Croydon, North-West (Mr. Wicks). The hon. Gentleman has totally failed to understand the history of the past few years. Government initiatives have contributed substantially to an improvement of the position in inner cities, and the urban regeneration agency will be able to focus the funds and powers available more effectively and do much to bring hope to the people who live in inner cities.

Mr. Gunnell : Will the Secretary of State assure us that when land is acquired by the agency from local authorities, those authorities will be credited with the capital receipt?

Mr. Howard : Proper arrangements will have to be made for the provision of compensation when land is taken by the agency. The hon. Gentleman will see the detailed provisions that I shall make when the Bill is published.

Next Section (Debates)

Home Page