| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
10.30 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Sir Paul Beresford): I congratulate my right hon. Friend the Member for Sutton Coldfield(Sir N. Fowler) on securing the debate and thank him as well. He has used constituency examples of a frequently raised conundrum. Britain is a small island with areas that are relatively densely populated. We have a bright and growing economy, which leads to demands for growth in the housing, leisure and industrial sectors. There is also the demand that we jealously guard our precious green belt. That has been spelt out clearly by my right hon. Friend.
Much has been done to try to meet both demands. Much of the Department's approach to planning, urban regeneration and movement in the inner cities has taken that direction. The drive to re-use sites is incredible. Even Birmingham council, with its planning policy, has been persuaded to follow this line. I understand that about50 per cent. of new houses in the Birmingham area are on re-used sites. That is encouraging. If we can persuade an authority like Birmingham to take that approach, there is hope for us all.
My right hon. Friend asked about our policy on green belts. It was set out clearly in planning policy guidance note No. 2 of January 1995. Furthermore, the west
midlands planning guidance, which was published in September 1995, strongly reaffirmed national green belt policy. It was made clear that there was no case for a fundamental review of the west midlands green belt. My right hon. Friend will be able to use that.
The guidance also proposed, as it were, that the region should be ready to provide up to two large sites for new industrial and commercial investment, each by a large multinational organisation, to the major benefit of the regional economy. The sites were to be of at least50 hectares. I apologise for using metric measures. Perhaps it is a sign of my age or perhaps I am being a bit ambitious. The sites were to be in or adjacent to the metropolitan area or other large settlements. The guidance recognised that the sites might--I emphasise might--exceptionally need to be in whole or in part in the green belt.
As my right hon. Friend is almost certainly aware, there is a study in progress. It is being led by the West Midlands Forum of Local Authorities. The aim is to identify suitable general locations for the sites. We await the recommendations with interest. Any sites that are identified as a result of the study recommendations should come forward in development plans, which will be subject to the usual planning procedures of consultation, objection and public inquiry, for example.
My right hon. Friend has made clear--in effect, by heavy typing--his concern and that of his constituents about the proposals for major industrial development in the Minworth area of Sutton Coldfield. Residents in the area are, of course, concerned. That concern was expressed clearly and emphatically tonight.
We do not know yet whether the forum will recommend Minworth as a general location for major industrial development. If it does, it will have to surmount some major hurdles. We would consider the proposal very carefully against our national planning policy on green belts, and against the regional planning guidance for the west midlands, including the green belt. We would want to consider especially whether exceptional circumstances exist, and are so exceptional that they might justify development in the green belt. We would need to be certain that any development would not set a precedent for further development in the area, about which my right hon. Friend has warned.
We would expect Birmingham to amend its unitary development plan to incorporate any such development proposal. That would open it up to detailed scrutiny through the normal process of public consultation, objection and--as requested by my right hon. Friend--public inquiry. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State would have power to direct modifications to the plan, or to call it in for his own decision.
If a planning application was made in the meantime for such a proposal, Birmingham city council would have to give local people the opportunity to comment, and would be unable to grant planning permission without referring it to us, because it would be a departure from its plan. We would have to consider very carefully, in the light of our own policies, Birmingham's plans, all the comments on the application--we have heard some pretty emphatic comments this evening--and whether it should be called in by the Secretary of State for his own decision. As my right hon. Friend suggested, I cannot go further than that at this stage.
My right hon. Friend touched on the planning application recently submitted for 500 houses on the land south of Duttons lane. I am afraid that I must confirm that the site is not in the green belt and is currently allocated for housing development in the unitary development plan, which has been through all the necessary procedures. There is only one small proviso, which is not particularly helpful--that the site should not be developed until 1997 at the earliest, but we are nearly there, of course.
I understand that Birmingham city council has not yet reached a view on the recent application, so at least that procedure must be gone through, and the application has not been referred to me. I can confirm, however--I consider this important--that the Government remain strongly committed to the preservation of an effective green belt in the west midlands to the east and north of Sutton Coldfield. Development in the green belt may take place only in exceptional circumstances, and the onus is on the proponents of the development to show that such circumstances exist. If a specific proposal for development is made, either within or outside the context of the forum study that is now in progress, we shall consider very carefully whether it should be called in for the Secretary of State's decision. I have certainly heard every word that has been said this evening, but at this stage I cannot say what the outcome will be.
Question put and agreed to.
Adjourned accordingly at twenty-three minutes to Eleven o'clock.
| Index | Home Page |