HC Deb 04 March 1952 vol 497 cc180-1
5 Mr. George Tomlinson

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government (1) if he is aware that the proposal to erect a 100-foot gas holder in the centre of Farnworth contravenes every principle of town planning; and if he will, therefore, review the decision to allow it.

(2) on what grounds the decision to allow the erection of the 100-foot gas holder in the centre of the borough of Farnworth was taken.

(3) whether he has considered a communication from the Farnworth Borough Council protesting against his decision to allow the erection of a 100-foot gas holder in the centre of the town; and what reply he has sent to the communication.

Mr. H. Macmillan

The decision to allow a 100-foot gas holder in Farnworth was taken by the county council as local planning authority. They were influenced, I understand, by the fact that there is already a 50-foot gas holder on this site and that to keep the new one down nearer to the height of the existing one would involve considerable expenditure of money and materials. I would not feel justified in reversing this decision which was taken more than two years ago, and I am writing accordingly to the borough council, from whom I have heard. I am sending the right hon. Gentleman a copy of my letter.

Mr. Tomlinson

Is the Minister aware that this holder is sited within 50 yards of the town hall, will dominate the centre of the town and render any question of the re-development of that part of the town impossible if it is erected?

Mr. Macmillan

I quite appreciate the right hon. Gentleman's feelings. I understand them, but in this case, where the planning authority gave its consent, and where such a very heavy additional cost in materials and labour would be concerned in altering that decision, I do not think it my duty as Minister to interfere.

Mr. Tomlinson

Is the Minister also aware that every official associated with town planning, either locally or on the part of the authority itself, has condemned the scheme, and only the Tory-dominated planning committee of the county council is insisting upon it?

Mr. Macmillan

I do not think that the right hon. Gentleman ought to make that imputation, nor do I feel the difference between the existing stack of one height and another makes as much difference as all that.

Mr. Tomlinson

Why has the Minister gone back on a decision of the previous Minister at least to reduce the height of this holder by 25 feet? Does he consider that 100 feet of ugliness is better than 75 feet?

Mr. Macmillan

I did not think that a reduction of 25 feet was worth £50,000 and the 270 tons of additional steel and 440 tons of additional cast iron which would be needed to build at the alternative height.

Mr. Tomlinson

Are we to take it that in future no industrial town that was built without planning years ago is to derive any advantage from town planning today?

Mr. Macmillan

No, Sir.