HC Deb 01 May 1951 vol 487 cc1143-52

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

10.13 p.m.

Wing Commander Bullus (Wembley, North)

My good fortune in securing the Adjournment debate tonight is offset by the occasion as, following an important Division, my opening remarks are unlikely to be heard. I make no excuse, however, for taking the attention of the House away from the materialistic question which we have been discussing, to direct it, for a few minutes, to the necessity for the preservation of trees and the planting, where possible, of many more trees.

I am encouraged by the mention of the glory of trees in a leading article in the "Evening Standard" which appeared last week, and to a eulogy of the oak which appeared in the "Daily Express" of Saturday last. To my mind, the subject becomes especially significant at this time of the year, when trees are in their first seasonal glory, and when we are but a matter of hours from the opening of the Festival of Britain.

For many years I have been concerned at the extent of tree felling in this country. Many districts are gradually being denuded of their trees and of their foliage. I am confirmed in my opinion by a statement made on 4th April in another place by the Lord Chancellor in a speech on the Forestry Bill, when he said: I confess that I am beginning to get quite appalled concerning the extent to which our trees are being cut down. He continued: After all, trees—and in this connection I mean roadside trees and hedgerow trees—largely constitute the beauty of our countryside, and it is lamentable to see the extent to which, owing to the need for timber, and so on, at the present time, they are being sacrificed. I think that the majority, if not all, of hon. Members in the House will agree with the Lord Chancellor, and will share his concern. He made a particular reference to forests and trees in the West Country but tree felling is not merely confined to that part of the country. It is widespread.

I am aware that local authorities have powers to make preservation orders, and it may be that in his reply the Parliamentary Secretary will tell us what use, generally, has been made of these powers. I am not asking necessarily for a greater use of these powers, but I seek to call attention to the fact that we are losing annually many trees, and I would make the plea that where preservation is not possible new trees may be planted to replace those felled.

In some 20 years' service with local authorities as a city councillor, I have long realised that much felling is due to development, to the dangers caused by such trees as the elm tree, and to other causes. I know, also, of the good work done by many local authorities, not only in preservation, but in tree planting. In Leeds, before the war, I saw a new ring road driven through the Chapeltown Valley. Scores of young trees were planted by the Leeds Corporation on either side of that highway, and today, as you yourself must know, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, the Gledhow Valley Road is one of the most beautiful roads in that city.

I also remember, before the war, when slum clearance was at its height in Leeds, the Rev. Charles Jenkinson, then Chairman of the Housing Committee, whose untimely death was mourned by political friend and foe alike, announcing that for each new house built in the City of Leeds, a tree would also toe planted. In more recent years, another enlightened local authority, the Bedfordshire County Council, planted 500 trees on their smallholdings estates to celebrate the birth of Prince Charles. They planted lime, plane, red oak, beech, sycamore, horse chestnut and Norway maple.

I think that Festival year is another great opportunity for all local authorities to celebrate by tree planting ceremonies, and I hope that many, if not all, will make full use of the occasion to add to the number of trees in this country. In my own borough, Wembley, another enlightened local authority, if I may say so, it is estimated that there are probably 15,000 trees. Many of them are on the council's own open spaces, and will be carefully preserved for amenity purposes. On Saturday last, I looked from the Wembley Stadium at one of the few hills in Middlesex, Barn Hill, which is surmounted by scores of trees outlined against the horizon. This land is about the most expensive in the county of Middlesex, for the council bought 2.5 acres of it in 1937 for £7,710 in order to preserve the trees. The cost worked out at over £77 a tree, but it was a worth-while purchase.

About 25 per cent. of Wembley's 15,000 trees have been registered for preservation, but there has been no general removal of unregistered trees. Not everyone is favourably disposed towards restriction but most are co-operative when their fears have been allayed and when they learn our council is always prepared to see an owner's point of view and to give consent to removal where circumstances make it desirable. In such cases our council impose a condition requiring another tree to be planted to make good the loss. They offer the advice of the borough engineer and surveyor in selecting a suitable tree. Our council officer is always available to any resident requiring advice on any tree—either as to its condition or its effect on property—to assist in maintaining the trees in the borough at a high standard.

I would commend this practice of assistance and guidance to other local authorities. Some such authorities have appointed tree-planting officers. Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary can tell us how many such officers have been appointed in the country. Many authorities and Government Departments are concerned with the preservation of trees. In addition to the Ministry of Local Government and Planning and the Forestry Commission, there are the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Transport, which Ministry, in its circulars, indicates that the securing of sound technical advice will contribute to economy. There are also the Service Departments.

There should be maximum co-operation on the subject with all these Departments. The Secretary of State for War told my hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland (Mr. Vane) on 18th April that approximately 60,000 trees were planted by his Department last year to improve the amenities of camps and that a similar number of trees were planted in training areas. But what a small number. Could not more be planted by Service Departments? The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Local Government and Planning will know that some trees in Harrow will have to be cut down because of Service requirements. Will these trees be replaced?

Other interested bodies in addition to Government Departments and local authorities are the National Parks, the National Trust, and tree-lover groups in different parts of the country. I was glad that the Earl of Listowel was able to give assurance last month that the Forestry Commission have no intention of felling any trees which are part of the scenic beauty of some area owned by the National Trust.

I have raised this subject entirely on the amenity value, but there are some obvious economic considerations for growing as many trees as possible. There are many landscapes in this country in which the beauty rests wholly upon the trees, whether they grow naturally or have been planted by an owner. I am aware that this subject was raised in this House just two years ago by Mr. Skeffington-Lodge. I have read the OFFICIAL REPORT of that debate and no doubt the Parliamentary Secretary has also read it. Perhaps he could indicate what additional progress has been made during the last two years.

I think there will be many who, like myself, appreciate trees and are interested in this subject. I never forget that, as a boy, I lived in a district of woodlands and I was grateful to those who planted and preserved the trees. Today, living in Harrow-on-the-Hill, I look on to a mass of glorious foliage in a preserve of trees, and because I appreciate this heritage I am anxious that in future generations the inhabitants of our land will have no cause to be less appreciative of our efforts today.

10.25 p.m.

Mr. Vane (Westmorland)

If we want any better illustration of the widespread interest in this country in the question of trees, we have merely to look at the Government benches where we see only the Parliamentary Secretary, who cannot avoid being here, and a Whip attending him whose face betrays his boredom. The British public are very curious, because either they pay no attention at all to the subject or else they object equally when one is cutting down a tree and when one is planting. It is really beyond all comprehension.

I do not want to take the words out of the Parliamentary Secretary's mouth, but I think he will be able to say that many of the points raised by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Wembley, North (Wing Commander Bullus), are likely to be met by the provisions of a Bill which is now in another place. I can only hope that the Bill will reach the Statute Book in such a shape that it can form the basis of a really sensible forest law on the lines of the forest laws of Denmark, Germany and Sweden—not on the lines on which the Bill was originally introduced in another place.

I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will be able to say that it is the intention of his Department to encourage the planting of trees round the many Government installations which now are the chief items disfiguring our countryside—camps, concrete roads, and so on. Here, again, we can learn from our defeated enemies. If we look at many of the camps in Germany, we see that something has been done in that country which is a great deal better than anything yet attempted here. We are told about a paltry 60,000 trees planted on training areas—less than 30 acres worth. When we think how not only the beauty of Salisbury Plain could be improved by the planting of many hundreds of acres, but also the training value of the area might be improved at the same time, we must hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will consider the point.

I was glad to hear that at least one local authority in this country is enlightened on the subject of trees, but 99 out of every 100 are as ignorant on the subject as they are indifferent to it. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] That is perfectly true. Often councils are advised by those who do not know one sort of tree from another.

When this House considered a section of the Town and Country Planning Act which dealt with tree preservation orders I am sure hon. Members had in mind the famous avenues and clumps of trees which are found in some of our beauty spots. Instead, tree preservation orders now extend over 20,000 to 30,000 acres of the country and are likely to extend a great deal further. I ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether he cannot leave this very difficult matter of forestry policy in the hands of the proper forestry authorities, himself only to consider the problem of those trees which have not a timber value but which have basically an amenity value in our cities and in their immediate surroundings.

10.28 p.m.

Colonel Clarke (East Grinstead)

I want to add to the views expressed already the further view that if we are to have really good amenity timber our policy must not stop with the planting. So often I have seen trees planted and then simply left, and in a few years they have been ruined so that they never make good amenity timber. Nearly always they are planted too close together and thinning is neglected. Very often a little pruning might make all the difference, as a tree is much improved by being kept to a single leader.

Finally, as trees grow older it is essential to cut out the dying branches, close to the trunk, in such a way that the bark will heal completely. That is seldom done. It is not enough to plant the tree and to leave it at that. Care must be exercised afterwards. I could continue, but I want to give the Parliamentary Secretary plenty of time in which to reply, so I will say no more tonight.

10.29 p.m.

Lieut.-Commander Baldock (Harborough)

There are many aspects of this problem of the preservation of trees, but time does not permit more than a very short reference to it. The amenity value in beauty spots and in the general landscape has already been dealt with adequately. The House appreciates that local authorities have powers to preserve these trees. As we have heard, some are doing it well. But there are other ways in which our heritage of trees is being greatly reduced, for modern agriculture tends to destroy hedgerows and trees as well as small copses.

This is done in the name of efficiency, and where attractive hedges and hedgerows used to stand we now see huge tracts of land with electric fences and wires running across them. I hope that this development will not go too far. Some of the more advanced economists from the London School of Economics would have us convert the whole English countryside into vast plains on the Continental pattern, with no landscape or trees or hedgerows. I believe that that would be just as much a disaster for the general appearance of the English scene as it would be bad economics.

Finally, from the main economic point of view, most of the damage is being done in cases whether timber merchants are buying woodlands, felling the trees, and then leaving the land unplanted and selling it for a nominal sum per acre to anyone who will buy it. In Sussex, there are hundreds of acres of this sort of country which, formerly, grew good timber and now grows nothing but silver birch, hazel and scrub.

One hopes that that kind of thing will be reduced in the future, because not only is it spoiling the general features of the landscape but it must be making mortgages upon the future. If these trees are not replaced, if timber merchants are simply going to ravage existing woodlands without replacing them with hard wood, then the outlook for those succeeding generations who may want that type of timber is indeed a poor one.

10.32 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Local Government and Planning (Mr. Lindgren)

First of all, I would like to express my appreciation to the hon. and gallant Member for Wembley, North (Wing Commander Bullus), for raising this subject and of the remarks by other hon. Members. Debates such as the hon. and gallant Member has raised, although at this late hour and in a sparsely filled House, do give publicity which is necessary to this subject. May I assure the hon. and gallant Member that so far as my right hon. Friend is concerned, he is not only interested in this subject, but very knowledgeable as well? So far as I am concerned, the interest is there, but I must admit that the extensive knowledge of trees is not.

The hon. and gallant Member for Wembley, North, certainly did not try to make any political "cracks," though one or two other hon. Members did. For many generations there has been heavy tree felling without any attempt at replacement or restocking. The Labour Government, since 1945, cannot be blamed for the depletions, the wanton depletions, in this country.

Mr. Vane

No one was.

Mr. Lindgren

Hon. Members in an Adjournment debate make all sorts of "cracks" at us, but when a Minister tries to reply to them they want to interject, although we behave ourselves and do not interfere with the speeches they make.

Brigadier Head (Carshalton)

I am interested in trees and have listened to the speeches in an impartial way. I could not detect any attempt by an hon. Member to make political capital out of this subject.

Mr. Lindgren

I congratulate the hon. and gallant Member on his interest.

As I was saying, there has for generations been heavy felling of trees which ought not to have taken place. That is now being checked. The power to check such felling has been available since the Public Health Act, 1875, but those powers were not very much used. Since just before 1945, in the Road Improvement Act, and since 1945, in the Town and Country Planning Act, 1947, there have been other powers. The latter Act provides for tree preservation powers and so does the National Parks Act. The various Forestry Acts gave power of dedication and grant schemes to enable owners to obtain assistance in planting.

First of all, there is the general question of large-scale forestry schemes. No one can fell now without a licence from the Forestry Commission, and as the hon. Member for Westmorland (Mr. Vane) hinted in his remarks, there is in the Bill which is now before another place, the provision that as well as the licence to fell there must be re-planting. Large-scale felling is now under control, and if this Bill goes through, not only will that be under control, but there will also be something more of constructive control in that future plantings will be safeguarded.

This debate has concerned itself much more with the "miscellaneous" felling; not with the "utility" tree, but with what might be termed the "amenity" or more beautiful tree. Local authorities have the power of preservation under the Town and Country Planning Act, 1947, and I was asked how many preservation orders have been placed by local authorities. The answer is about 600 under the 1947 Act, and they cover about 17,000 acres. The preservation order, as hon. Members know, does not mean that felling is stopped, but that felling cannot take place without the permission of the local authority which generally requires some replacement of the timber which is removed.

Preservation orders have rather checked the unfortunate tendency of speculation in the purchasing of estates, not for estate development, but simply for the timber and its wanton felling. That tendency has been checked by the preservation order and local authorities and the Forestry Commission have co-operated in this matter very well. We should be appreciative of the excellent work being done by local authorities in conjunction with the Forestry Commission, which has come about in a very short time. There is harmonious working. Great help has been given to local authorities by the Forestry Commission through advice and help and the opportunity to co-operate in schemes in areas with which the Forestry Commission has for so long been associated.

As far as planting is concerned, the Forestry Commission is doing its job exceptionally well. The land owner with land suitable for tree planting, is helped by the Forestry Commission, through its dedication schemes and grants, to make further plantings. Everything it is possible to do to encourage owners of land suitable for planting will be done. A word should be said about the hedgerow tree and the copse. The beauty which can be seen from one end of our country to the other, and which is generally appreciated, often arises from those two things. In these days of a change-over in farming from pasture land and the small field to large-scale arable farming, with large fields cultivated by mechanical means, there has been a tendency among farmers to destroy the hedgerow tree, and unfortunately not to replace it. The Ministry of Agriculture, and, in particular, the Minister, are conscious of the problem, and have been doing all that is possible, in co-operation with the National Farmers' Union, young farmers clubs, and other bodies, to emphasise the necessity of replacing the hedgerow tree and the copse in some other part of the farm where it does not interfere quite so much with the general operation of the mechanical appliances on farms today. It is also true that present day methods of hedging are not conducive to the development of the young tree. Today, with a more mechanised system of laying hedges the young tree does not get a chance of coming through, even where the hedge is still left.

I am hopeful that the co-operation of the Ministry of Agriculture, and all those in the countryside associated with agriculture, we shall be able to stop what has been an unfortunate development over the past few years. As the hon. and gallant Member for Harborough (Lieut.-Commander Baldock) has suggested, the desire for ease of access to roads, the desire of timber merchants to get an easy tree, as well as the natural desire of the farmer, like anyone else, to get a little easy money, has made it difficult to deal with a problem which ought to have been dealt with more strictly.

The hon. and gallant Member for Wembley, North, referred to Bedfordshire and other places that are doing good work in tree planting, and——

The Question having been proposed after Ten o'Clock, and the debate having continued for half an hour, Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at Seventeen Minutes to Eleven o'Clock.