HC Deb 18 January 1949 vol 460 cc5-6
9. Mr. Skeffington-Lodge

asked the Minister of Town and Country Planning whether he has considered the apprehensions expressed to him by the hon. Member for Bedford and others at his decision, following the public inquiry into the proposals of Messrs. Earles to extend their cement works in the Hope Valley; and whether, in view of its adverse effect on the amenities of a potential national park as well as on farming interests in the district, he will reconsider his verdict and in the meantime make a public statement.

Mr. King

The decision to allow an extension of these works was taken after very full consideration of all points of view and after a local inquiry lasting three days. My right hon. Friend is fully satisfied that the expansion of the works is necessary in the interests of national cement production, that the new works will in many ways be an improvement on the existing works, and that the conditions imposed for the landscaping and after-treatment of the land will minimise the adverse effects, if any, on the amenities of the area.

Mr. Skeffington-Lodge

Is my hon. Friend aware that the reply he has just given will not satisfy large numbers of people in the country who believe that the decision of the Minister is a definite and heavy blow at the National Parks movement? Is he further aware that to make the top end of the Hope Valley derelict for 117 years, as will be the case if this project goes through, is an extremely anti-social thing?

Mr. King

This is a decision the necessity for which we naturally regret, but we must have regard to the overwhelming demand for cement and, subject to reasonable after-care of the land—which we believe we have provided in this case—we are bound to consider that, too.

Mr. Molson

Has the Minister issued, or if not, will he issue an explanation of the decision he has come to; a reasoned statement of why he has arrived at this conclusion after the inquiry?

Mr. King

A very full Press report was issued and it contained much of the information which the hon. Gentleman seeks.

Mr. Lipson

Can my hon. Friend say whether there was any alternative put forward to this factory which would have produced the cement required? Also, could he not place in the Library a copy of the evidence given by both sides at the inquiry, because there is great concern, and hon. Members would like to form their own judgment?

Mr. King

On the first point, there is an overall shortage of cement and we want as far as possible to develop all practicable proposals. I will certainly consider the second point.

Mr. Henry Strauss

Has the hon. Gentleman considered the representations made by the National Trust, and is he aware of the grave anxiety that the National Trust entertains on this matter?

Mr. King

Yes, we have given full consideration to all those representations and to many others on the other side, too. We have tried to strike a balance.

Mr. Keeling

is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that in deciding to destroy the beauty of this lovely valley for ever, the Government did not even give reasons for rejecting the alternatives? Does he think that is fair and just?

Mr. King

I must submit that we have not destroyed the natural beauty for ever, and if careful study is given to the plan it will be found that great care has been taken as far as is possible—and to a large extent it is possible—to preserve that beauty.

Mr. Skeffington-Lodge

Owing to the very unsatisfactory nature of the reply, and in spite of the fact that I am sailing to America tomorrow for some long time, I beg to give notice that I will raise this matter at the first opportunity on my return.