§ 2.38 p.m.
§ THE EARL OF ALBEMARLEMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will consider imposing a heavier scale of penalties on those who discharge into rivers or estuaries sewage effluent which falls below Royal Commission standards, since too light penalites awarded in the courts at present do not prevent the repetition of offences of this kind, and frequently deter the prosecuting authorities.]
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE, DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (LORD SANDFORD)Yes, my Lords. As my right honourable friend announced in another place on October 20, it is the Government's intention, as soon as opportunity occurs, to legislate for substantial increases in the fines which can be awarded on summary conviction for pollution offences and to enable more offences to be dealt with on indictment. The particular offence to which the noble Lord refers is related not so much to Royal Commission standards, but to standards imposed by the river authority in each particular case.
§ THE EARL OF ALBEMARLEMy Lords, I should like to thank my noble friend for that interesting and comprehensive Answer. I should also like to ask whether, when these intricate chemical 563 subjects have to be dealt with in these proceedings, the Government will consider assisting local benches by providing independent scientist assessors to help magistrates in reaching their verdict?
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, I see the problem and I shall be glad to consider how it can best be overcome.
§ THE EARL OF ALBEMARLEMy Lords. I thank my noble friend.
§ LORD KILMANYMy Lords, may I ask my noble friend whether this legislation will include Scotland?
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, I prefer to have notice of that Question, because I am not certain whether it will be in the same legislation or in different legislation.
§ LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORDMy Lords, while welcoming the prospect of higher penalties, may I ask my noble friend whether he will indicate which authority will be responsible for the prosecutions after 1974?
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, I cannot be drawn on that matter at this stage.
§ LORD RHODESMy Lords, does the Minister mean to say that each river authority can set its own standards?
§ LORD SANDFORDNot exactly, my Lords. The Royal Commission standards are a guide, but each river authority can take account of local conditions.
§ LORD BRECONMy Lords, may I ask my noble friend whether these penalties will apply to local authorities which continue to put crude sewage into a river?
§ LORD SANDFORDBroadly speaking, my Lords, yes.
§ LORD SLATERMy Lords, can the Minister state whether these penalties will apply to the water which is used in the washing process in the mining industry? The water must be disposed of somehow, and after it has gone through a kind of grid it eventually gets back into the river.
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, I take the noble Lord's point. But these are the kinds of local conditions which have to be taken into account.
§ LORD WYNNE-JONESMy Lords, in view of the noble Lord's Answer, can he tell us why the Minister was not prepared to allow the Tynemouth authority to have a proper scheme for sewage purification?
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, did I understand the noble Lord to refer to the Tyne?
§ LORD WYNNE-JONESI referred to the Tynemouth authority.
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, I think the noble Lord will know that my right honourable friend the Secretary of State some time ago announced a scheme for the cleaning up of the Tyne generally, involving public expenditure of about £30 million.
§ LORD WYNNE-JONESMy Lords, I referred to Tynemouth, not to the Tyne.
§ LORD PARGITERMy Lords, can the noble Lord say exactly what consultations are taking place with a view to getting the same standards in Europe and in this country?
§ LORD SANDFORDNot without notice, my Lords.