HL Deb 13 January 1976 vol 367 cc123-5WA
The Lord Bishop of LONDON

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they will make a Statement about the Report of the National Parks Policy Review Committee.

Baroness BIRK

My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Environment and my right honourable and learned friend the Secretary of State for Wales have now completed their consideration of the Report and I am placing a copy of their conclusions in the Library of the House.

I should like to express our gratitude to Lord Sandford to the members of his Committee and to all those who submitted evidence to the Committee or commented on their Report. I should also like to say how much we have been helped in our consideration of the Report by the Countryside Commission although I should emphasise that they do not agree with all our conclusions. The parks are one of our most important national assets and it is appropriate at this point in time—some 20 years after the parks were designated—that we should thoroughly review future long term policies for them.

On the central issue of conservation versus public enjoyment the Committee have concluded that both must continue to be given due importance and that the main emphasis must be not on negative restriction but on positive management policies designed where possible to reconcile conflicts. Nevertheless, as the Committee have also pointed out, some further powers of control are desirable and, in the last resort and in some areas, it will be necessary to give priority to the conservation of the natural beauty of the parks. This general line of approach is one we very much endorse.

As regards the individual recommendations we have in whole or part endorsed the majority. There are however some which we have not been able to accept. The most important concern forestry, where we consider that the administrative arrangements established since the Committee reported make the imposition of planning control unnecessary; minerals, where we consider that the normal planning control procedures should continue to operate; and national heritage areas, on which the Committee were themselves divided and which has met with general disapproval. A recurrent theme in the Committee's Report is that additional resources ought to be allocated to national park purposes. In present circumstances, however, additional resources could only be provided at the expense of other local authority services, and the national parks must be subject to whatever constraints may be necessary in the light of the developing economic situation. The overriding duty of the national park authorities over the next few years, therefore, will be to ensure that limited resources are employed with discrimination and in the most cost-effective way possible.

Certain of our conclusions are not dependent either on legislation or additional resources and appropriate action can be taken without delay. As the conclusions which require legislation do not involve the use of mandatory powers we shall proceed with the preparation of the necessary legislation and will introduce it when Parliamentary time is available. We believe that the national park authorities would welcome an increase in the range of policy options in allocating whatever resources will be available to them from year to year.

£ million
1975
1972 1973 1974 January-June
United Kingdom Imports (cif) 254.1 214.4 326.9 209.9
United Kingdom Exports (fob) 20.6 41.5 36.7 22.8
Netherlands Imports (cif) 44.3 84.9 117.0 75.4
Netherlands Exports (fob) 259.7 359.3 395.7 275.7
Source: United Kingdom figures are taken from the Overseas Trade Statistics and figures for the Netherlands are derived from the OECD Series B publication for years 1972 and 1973 and from national sources for 1974 and 1975.