HC Deb 20 March 1945 vol 409 cc774-82

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. Mathers.]

9.18 p.m.

Sir Geoffrey Mander (Wolverhampton, East)

I wish to call attention to the question of national parks, concerning which I gave notice some weeks ago. The principle of national parks is generally accepted by the people of this country. Wherever they live, they are only too anxious to be near a national park, and to be able to ramble in it. The question, first, is, What do I mean precisely by a national park? I would say that it should consist of regions of the finest landscape in the country, which are to be preserved in all their natural beauty. There is no suggestion that farming and the ordinary pursuits of the countryside should not be continued inside these parks. The proposal is that they should be kept in the state they are in, and that the access now attainable should be maintained, and, as far as possible, more access to mountains permitted, so as to enable the largest possible number of people to take advantage of the open air and to go for long cross-country walks in their holidays. The, country concerned is mainly mountainous or along the coast of this country. There is no need at all to disturb the existing system of land ownership. It does not really affect that question one way or the other. May I ask, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, that, when I gave notice to the Minister on this matter, the Government should see to it that the right hon. Gentleman is here to take part in the Debate, and may I ask the Government to be good enough to secure the attendance of the Minister at the earliest possible moment?

Mr. Molson (The High Peak)

Who is the Minister?

Sir G. Mander

The 'Minister of Town and Country Planning.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. James Stuart)

The Minister is on his way.

Sir G. Mander

What will be needed to some extent, in addition to carrying on the ordinary pursuits of the countryside, is greater access in certain cases to the uplands, but it certainly is in the minds of those interested in national parks to maintain the countryside in its integrity and in its main -features as it is at the present time. Nobody would desire that national parks should be museum pieces in any sense. We want them to be a living organ. You get a very good analogy of that in the houses that come under the National Trust. The last thing they want is that they should be museum pieces. They are houses which are lived in and to which people have access so that they can see beautiful and interesting things under the normal conditions of life. There would be, in these parks, really a combination of agriculture and of park.

I may, perhaps, give some illustrations, There are the Lake district, of course, the largest of all, Snowdonia, the Peak, with which I may associate Dovedale, the Yorkshire coast and the Yorkshire moors, part of the Cornish coast and Exmoor and Dartmoor. Those are a few examples of the best kind, but I would say that the best definition of a national park is that it should be not less than 200 square miles in area. That would mean, roughly, an area about 14 miles across, or a good day's walk. The Lake district, of course, is much larger than that. It is 800 square miles in area and there you get a couple of day's walking straight across, so long as you do not climb all the highest mountains on the way.

What is the Parliamentary history of this matter? There have been, within recent years, the Addison Committee of 1931, which reported strongly in favour of the parks, though nothing has been done. Then there was the Scott Committee's Report of 1942, which definitely made a recommendation that, under the Central Planning Authority, there should be set up a National Parks Commission by Act of Parliament under 'a Minister and responsible to him, and with adequate funds and with specific duties. It is really necessary, in matters of this kind, not to be, content with pious resolutions and hopes and perorations. If we want something done, we have got to create the machinery and get the technical experts to devote their time day after day to the whole problem. We have a very good example in the Catering Act passed last year. Now that the Commission have got down to it, they are doing this kind of technical job that is required in a matter of this kind. Then I would like to ask the Minister what has happened about the John Dower Report, which is the Report of a very well known expert appointed by the right hon. Gentleman's Department in 1943 to make a Report, which, I think, the Minister has either received or will soon receive. I hope it will be published and I hope action will be taken upon it and upon the other Reports that we have had, too.

Then there is the question of the planning authority. A matter of this kind, that cuts right across the existing planning authorities would have to be dealt with in a novel manner. I should have thought that the best way would be to make the national park a standard unit in itself responsible to the Minister who looks after planning in that particular area. I cannot help remembering that the Government are themselves some of the most dangerous enemies of national parks, quite unwillingly and unintentionally, of course. When we remember the controversy that has arisen over the Requisitioned Land and War Works Bill, which certainly affects some of these areas, we must be on guard against the actions of various Departments of State and have some body, such as a Commission, reporting to Parliament and the country on what is taking place.

There has recently been a White Paper on the control of land use published by the Government which has not met with the enthusiastic response that they would have desired, but which does contain some interesting proposals which certainly affect national parks. There is the question of dealing with rural land and betterment and other matters affecting this particular question, but I do not think we need really be concerned with the particular manner in which this problem is going to be worked out. We do not want to delay action now in setting up the necessary authority by reason of the fact that we have not yet agreed upon the precise method of land development and compensation. The great thing is to set up the National Parks Commission with adequate finance.

With regard to compensation, I venture to think that it is not a very serious prob- lem in this connection. Most of this land is agricultural, but it may be there are exceptions in the High Peak, though, as a whole, I think it would be agreed that it is. May I point out what the national parks are not? They are not regional parks. They are not areas such as the Malvern Hills or Charnwood Forest. These are on a smaller scale and 11: is very important to preserve them, but it is right for them to be dealt with on a more regional basis. Nor are they green belts, which are quite a different problem. Such smaller areas around the towns are very important. Nor are they nature reserves. Nature reserves will, I hope, form part of many national parks. They are most admirable, but they are not, in themselves, what is meant by a national park, because they are reserved for living beings other than human beings, and I am interested in providing recreation for the particular product of evolution which is represented here in this House to-night. Nor arc they forest parks. Certain forests have been very well developed by the National Forestry Commission but they are rather on a different basis and are not the same thing.

Lastly, I want to appeal to the Government to seize this opportunity of taking a bold decision. They want to be popular, I am sure. They could not do a more popular and less expensive thing than to let the country know that they are, determined to go forward at once with setting up the necessary machinery to preserve this splendid part of our heritage. Land is limited in quantity in this country, and very beautiful land is very limited in quantity and is irreplacable. I ask the Minister to take a decision and to make it known and so play some part now in preserving this England for which we have been fighting for the last five or six years.

9.30 p.m.

Mr. Molson (The High Peak)

The House is indebted to my hon. Friend the Member for East Wolverhampton (Sir G. Mander) for raising to-night the question of national parks. He has done well to draw attention to what is exactly the meaning of a national park—an area which can be used for enjoyment by large numbers of people It is not neither purely regional nor is it preserved for some special purpose, but rather in order to give the inhabitants of large towns access to the countryside and the enjoyment of all that dwellers of the country ordinarily have about their homes. The High Peak is in a particular position in this way, lying between Sheffield, on the one hand, and Manchester, on the other, it is of very special value to the inhabitants of those two great industrial areas. I hope that we shall hear from the Minister of Town and Country Planning tonight that he and his Department realise the special value that there will be to the nation as a whole if an area, which is still very largely unspoilt by modern industrial or urban development, is preserved for generations of the future.

My hon. Friend said that this was not to be regarded merely as a forest area in the sense of trees growing there. But it is a forest area in the sense that the Norman Kings did get under their own special control large open areas for the pleasure of the chase, and what was a royal privilege at that time must now be regarded in this loth century as an opportunity for recreation and enjoyment for the vast industrial masses of Manchester and Sheffield. There are some things of very great interest there. I had thought that that part of it which is the property of the Duchy of Lancaster only dated back to John of Gaunt, but I was particularly interested a short time ago to find that the properties of the Duchy of Lancaster, including those in the High Peak, were originally put together by the uncle of John of Gaunt. I hope that the Minister of Town and Country Planning will see to it that a heritage which has been passed down for so long will be preserved for future generations against that encroachment which may take place. I trust, therefore, that we may hear from the Minister to-night that his Department are sympathetically considering the desirability and possibility of preserving national parks in a number of different parts of the country and that especially right at the very heart of England, a property anti an open space, may be preserved for the generations yet to come.

9.34 P.m.

Mr. John Dnģdale (West Bromwich)

I regret that I have not time to go back to John of Gaunt and I shall be very brief in my remarks. I arise only because, much though I appreciate the speech that the hon. Member for East Wolverhampton (Sir G. Mander) has made, and his advocacy of national parks, I hope he will not limit them entirely to large parks at a very great distance from centres of population. I noticed, in particular, that he said small parks did not come under the heading of national parks, and that they were something purely for the local population to organise amongst themselves. He mentioned, for example, Charnwood Forest. I would say that it is most important that we should not ony develop these large parks, but consider smaller parks such as Charnwood Forest in the Midlands and the Cotswolds; that we should preserve them and realise that a small park near a large centre of population is of just as great value as a large park farther away, and that as local authorities cannot necessarily always get together and arrange for the creation of such parks among themselves, the Government should come to their assistance, and see that these small parks are given just as high priority as the larger parks.

9.36 p.m.

Major Procter (Accrington)

For some time past I have been very interested in the proposals which have been put forward to the Minisry regarding the making into a national park of a northern part of Lancashire. Many people think that Lancashire is a county which is noted for its chimneys, cotton mills, factories and smoke, whereas northern Lancashire is one of the most beautiful counties in England and therefore in the world. When it is remembered that Turner immortalised part of it in that wonderful picture "The Crook of Lune," when it is remembered that we have well over 200 miles of lovely moors, mountains and valleys, which can be used to give quiet enjoyment to the people of the greatest industrialised county in England and that nearly 4,000,000 people are within easy access.of this wonderful panorama of beauty.

Then I must ask the Minister what he has done, or proposes to do, to make that part of Lancashire into a recreational centre. Can he tell us to-night whether he is going to make the south part of the lakes, which is in Lancashire—by the way, people do not think that the Lake District is in Lancashire—into a national park? Is he going to make the Trough of Bowland available for the people? [An HON. MEMBER: "It is in Yorkshire, not Lancashire."] Is he co-operating with the county council so that this will be done speedily and done well? It must be done—

Mr. Keelinģ (Twickenham)

Would not my hon. and gallant Friend allow the remaining seven minutes to the Minister in which to reply?

Major Procter

I can speak until 20 minutes to 10 and I will not exceed one minute of that time, and what I have to say is of great importance to my constituents.

Mr. Keelinģ

It is not so important as the Minister's reply.

Major Procter

I have been waiting for a long time for action to be taken. It must be remembered that industry has already made attempts to encroach on this beautiful district. Imperial Chemicals were going to put a chemical factory right on the confluence of the three rivers, Ribble, Calder and Hodder. The Calder already is simply an open sewer, and if the Minister of Town and Country Planning will come along and co-operate with the county councils of Yorkshire and Lancashire then, in my own time at least, we shall have this great breathing space, one of the few remaining open to the people of my constituency and the constituencies near to Accrington.

9.39 P.m.

The Minister of Town and Country Planninģ (Mr. W. S. Morrison)

My first duty is to apologise to the hon. Member who introduced this Debate, and to the House, for a few moments' delay in arriving in the Chamber. I understood that there was a Prayer to follow, but this experience teaches me that Ministers must watch while other people are supposed to pray. Let me say there is no difference of opinion on any side of the House about the desirability of the project which is the subject of my hon. Friend's speech to-night, It is our desire that those areas of special beauty in the country should be preserved for ever as the heritage of our people, as a place to which townsfolk can go and enjoy the unspoiled beauties of nature. We have taken the necessary preliminary steps towards the legislation which is necessary. The first step, undoubtedly, was research. There is a great deal of talk about national parks, but it is necessary to build a firm foundation and, as my hon. Friend mentioned, we have had the advantage of a thorough survey by a great expert on the subject, Mr. John Dower, who has reported to me, and whose report is now being considered by the various Departments Which are involved.

I wish to proceed on this important matter on a sure basis of fact, and on the basis of something which is feasible and which will work in with our national structure. It is easy to say that the Lake District should be a national park, but the difficulty arises over delimiting what are the borders of the Lake District, where the park starts and where it finishes. There are other problems of a practical nature which must be solved before this ideal can become a reality. One is the administration thereof. For example, there are planning authorities set up under the Statute, in all these districts, and it will need careful consideration to secure that the best planning control for this particular purpose is achieved.

I think the best course I can adopt is to put before hon. Members and the public the report I have received, so that I may have the benefit, after die consideration by hon. Members and the public, of their views and comments upon it. We have a great deal to do in my Ministry at the moment. There is the growing question of housing, and other clamant problems, but this work is going on steadily, and the necessary consultations are being carried on. I would point out to those who are apt to minimise the practical problems involved that transport is vital to the successful establishment of national parks. It is not only a case of ensuring that parks are preserved from the despoiling hand of the speculative builder. They would lose their purpose if the public cannot have easy and rapid access to them. These things have to be worked in. There are various other difficult problems involved in the fact that a great part of these areas consists of common land and the relationship between common land and the national park must be carefully worked out. But it is a project that lies close to my heart, and the necessary steps are being pursued.

The hon. Member who introduced this subject—for which I am grateful, and I only wish that the occasion was more propitious for a proper discussion of what is a great theme—told us of a lot of things which national parks are not. Reserving particularities, I agree with him. I do not think they ought to be confused with holiday camps; they are not resorts for people who wish to have the particularly sophisticated form of amusing holiday which the holiday camp provides. I say naming against holiday camps, there is a place for them, but I think these areas ought to be safeguarded for the people who wish to enjoy the unspoilt beauties of nature, to move among the scenery which has inspired many poets and philosophers in the past, and to obtain rest from the hurry and bustle of life. I hope the House will not expect me now to enumerate the names of the places I have in mind. They will appear in the report, together with a a descriptions of the considerations which have led us to choose these places. AU things taken together, that will provide a better basis for judgment than any mere list I might rattle off to-night. The giving of such a list at this late hour, and in such haste, might give rise to false hopes or fears, according to how one looks at it from the point of view of the authorities concerned.

Sir G. Mander

How soon will the report be published?

Mr. Morrison

I hope very shortly. We have had to revise the report in view of two events which have happened since it was compiled. One is the publication of our proposals for the control of land use, proposals for compensation and betterment, which means a certain amount of adaptation in the compensation proposals which were proposed before this White Paper came out.

Another thing is the passage of the Town and Country Planning Act of 1944, with its provisions for overspills and various powers given to local authorities. All these things have to be harmonised together. But I hope the House will agree with me in thanking my hon. Friend for raising the topic and will accept my assurance that the work of preparing a sound foundation for what I believe to be a great and enduring national project is going ahead as fast as possible. I hope that when hon. Members get the report they will give me the benefit of their advice and comment upon it, and that we shall get these parks established to fulfil the purpose they ought to with the full consent and informed knowledge and support of the British public irrespective of party or section.

Major Procter

Will North Lancashire be included in the report?

Mr. Morrison

There will be references to it.

Question put, and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at Fourteen Minutes to Ten o'Clock.