§ 18. Mr. G. Darlingasked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what consideration led him to consent to the request of the Manchester Corporation for the diversion of the Pennine Way.
§ Mr. SandysI was advised that the use by the public of a part of the route originally approved would under certain circumstances cause additional risk of pollution to the Manchester Corporation's water supply.
§ Mr. DarlingIs the Minister aware that all the expert evidence given at that inquiry is in complete opposition to the statement which he has just made? Is he further aware that the prospect of pollution from hikers going over these streams is infinitesimal compared with the pollution that now goes on from buildings alongside the railway and the reservoir? Does he realise that he has routed the Pennine Way through a bog, 139 and that in wet weather hikers will have to go back to the original route if they dc not want to go up to their knees in mud?
§ Mr. SandysI do not know anything about the bog. I realise that the alternative route is regarded as being less attractive, but I felt that the additional risk to health, however small it may be, was something which I had not the right to accept.
§ Mr. DarlingOn a point of order. In view of that unsatisfactory answer, which goes against all the expert advice, I beg to give notice that I shall try to raise the matter on the Adjournment.