HC Deb 22 March 1939 vol 345 cc1268-9
21. Sir Percy Hurd

asked the Secretary of State for Air whether he has considered the protests from municipal, agricultural and archaeological authorities, against the waste of public money involved in abandoning Yatesbury Camp after spending £380,000 upon it, and also against spending further large sums upon another site on an agricultural plateau which forefronts some of the finest down-land scenery and is of historic interest; and whether he will reconsider the whole matter?

Captain Balfour

My right hon. Friend has received objections against the proposal to remove in due course the training establishment temporarily located at Yatesbury, but he is unable to accept the suggestion that this will involve an unnecessary waste of public money. It was necessary to establish, as a matter of great urgency, a training establishment adjacent to an existing aerodrome, and Yatesbury was considered the most suitable site available and in any case, therefore, it would have been necessary to provide the accommodation in the first instance in temporary buildings. Very strong representations were made, however, against the permanent establishment of a Royal Air Force station at Yatesbury, and after giving full consideration to these my right hon. Friend decided to vacate the site if possible within four years.

In regard to the other site to which my hon. Friend refers, this is required to accommodate other establishments in addition to the training establishment which it is proposed eventually to transfer from Yatesbury. The acquisition of this site was also the subject of strong representations, which have been most carefully considered, but my right hon. Friend reached the conclusion that the site referred to was the only practicable one, and he is not, therefore, able to alter his decision.

Sir P. Hurd

Is it not a fact that, according to the highest opinion in Wiltshire, Yatesbury Camp is quite capable of the enlargement desired, and that this removal is a great waste of public money?

Captain Balfour

No, Sir. I could not accept that, for the reasons I have given at some length in the answer.

Sir Francis Fremantle

Is it not a fact that the second site suggested is in defiance of the town plan by which the owner has dedicated it for all time as an open space?

Captain Balfour

Both sites were, unfortunately, open to objection by public bodies and certain local residents and property owners, but my right hon. Friend has weighed up the matter very carefully and has come to the conclusion that, unfortunately, the objections to the Wroughton site must be over-ruled in the light of national necessity, as indeed is necessary in so many cases.

Sir F. Fremantle

Is it not a fact that this is not a case of mere national necessity, but a case of cutting across a national arrangement and an undertaking with regard to an open space?