HC Deb 07 December 1959 vol 615 cc185-94

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

10.43 p.m.

Mr. Frederick Peart (Workington)

I should like to draw attention to a problem affecting my constituency, namely, electricity supplies to the Lakeland area of my Division and to Maryport. Only on Saturday, I noticed in the Guardian that the whole question of priorities for the Lakeland has been raised. The Guardian said: For the first time since nationalisation eleven years ago, leaders of more than one and a half million North-west power consumers are to make a protest at national level against a decision taken by the area Electricity Board. The dispute concerns the order of priority in which power supplies should be taken to the Lake District. I believe that the dispute will involve not only my own Division but that of the hon. Member for Penrith and The Border (Mr. Whitelaw).

Priority for the Lakeland area has been a matter of concern for a very long time. I have raised it over and over again—and not as a party question. I have criticised my own Ministers, and if there is any delay even now I will criticise the present Ministers. I first raised the subject in 1950 with the then Minister of Fuel and Power. I was told that my constituents would have to wait for electricity until the capital investment programme had been worked out, when development could proceed; and hat the whole matter would be kept under review. I was not satisfied with that answer, and in 1951 I again raised the whole issue on the Adjournment.

I was told that the reason why my constituents would have to wait for electricity, why the whole of the Borrowdale area would have to wait, was first, the shortage of raw materials, and, secondly, the shortage of labour. Again I was told by the Minister that there was a limitation on capital expenditure and capital investment. All through those debates and those discussions with Ministers I was told that my constituents had their sympathy. However, in 1953 I raised this again in a general debate dealing with rural electrification, and again I got the same answer. On 4th May, 1954, I raised again the whole issue on the Adjournment. That was followed by another debate last year, on 27th June.

I am not going to repeat all the details about my area. I believe they are known to the Minister, and they are certainly known to the Department. All I will say is that the area in question is a very famous tourist area. The people in the Borrowdale, Buttermere and Loweswater Valleys cater every year for visitors from all over the British Isles and, indeed, from all over the world. So we are asking that my constituents should enjoy amenities so that they may be able to run their businesses well, to cater for the visitors who come to our lovely valleys.

When I raised this issue on 27th June, 1958, I had a rather unsympathetic reply from the then Parliamentary Secretary, Sir Ian Horobin. He argued that we could not go ahead with further electrification in parts of the area because of cost. He said: In fairness to all concerned, one must bear in mind that the remaining connections are extremely expensive and that must be considered when deciding which areas are to be done next and how far to go."—[OFFICIAL, REPORT: 27th June, 1958; Vol. 590, c. 846.] This argument was repeated when my right hon. Friend the former Member for Bishop Auckland intervened. The Parliamentary Secretary argued that in this area of Buttermere, Loweswater and Bullgill the expenses are now so high and the returns so low."—[OFFICIAL REPORT: 27th June, 1958; Vol. 590, c. 847.] He repeated the argument a few moments later: The reason for this low priority here is that, because the expense is so high and the possible return so low, it is better to do other areas first."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 27th June, 1958; Vol. 590, c. 848.] I intervened to argue: That cost argument means that these remote areas can never hope to get anything, because of priorities given to other areas."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 27th June, 1958; Vol. 590, c. 848.] I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will not tonight repeat the cost argument of his predecessor. As I have tried to show over and over again when we have argued this question of Borrowdale, Buttermere and Loweswater and the Lakeland valleys, we have always argued that the area should be treated as a unit. Borrowdale, for example, should be treated as a whole and the cost should be shared. That was why, when it was decided to electrify the valley—part of the valley has been electrified —we were rather dismayed that the scheme for the whole valley was not completed. As I press tonight the claims of these areas and other parts which lie on the fringe of Lakeland, parts of Cockermouth Rural District, areas like Embleton, I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will not use the cost argument. I believe that, after all, there is now a great opportunity for the Ministry to go ahead with an imaginative policy.

I ask the Government to say to the North Western Electricity Board that it will have no restriction on capital investment and that manpower will be available. I assure the Parliamentary Secretary that that manpower would be available. Indeed, near the Lakeland area, there is a serious unemployment problem in the West Cumberland Development Area. I am pretty certain that there could be no argument now about the manpower not being forthcoming.

I am not criticising the Board's general policy. I know from figures supplied to me by the Board that much has been done in the area. Figures from the North Western Electricity Board for the Lakeland sub-area show that during the year ending 31st March 346 farms and over 1,500 rural premises were connected to the electricity supply. In the same period approximately £255,000 were spent on rural electrification. Therefore, I accept that much has been done but, as I have tried to argue tonight, as I have done so often on previous occasions, the areas which I have mentioned were promised something over and over again by Ministers from both sides of the House.

I ask that in this period when a labour supply is available and when, I hope, there will be a surge forward in the economy, this area can be given a high measure of priority. I know that the supply is badly needed. For example, this summer, because of the very dry season, some of the hotels in the area in the Borrowdale Valley, which has not been electrified, faced serious problems arising from the shortage of water because the hotels were generating their own electricity from turbines driven by waterfalls. For a long period these good hotels in the Lakeland area had to use oil lamps and candles, and great inconvenience was caused not only to hotel owners but also to their guests.

This is just a small instance which illustrates the difficulties in a lovely Lakeland area which is one of our great tourists centres and needs to attract tourists to it over and over again. The hotels need modern amenities provided by electricity, and still they are not available. I therefore plead very strongly for this area in which I certainly have an interest since it is my own constituency. But I can also cite an urban area in my constituency. I have had correspondence from Maryport Urban District Council.

The town clerk wrote to me on 26th October last saying: For some considerable time now my Council have been pressing the North-Western Electricity Board to have the electricity supply extended in the King Street area in order to enable all the residents of this neighbourhood to have a supply of electricity in their homes. Therefore, I am pleading not only for the quick electrification of our Lakeland valleys, for a speeding up of the plans to electrify Borrowdale, Loweswater and Buttermere and the rural areas round them, but also that the Board should get along quickly with this scheme which is needed by residents of this part of Maryport. I have quoted the town clerk's letter and I believe it is important.

I have argued that there is no reason why plans should not go ahead. I know that it is not an easy matter. I understand that even in London there are many houses virtually within a stone's throw of the Houses of Parliament which are still relying on gas and still have no electricity supply. There the people cannot enjoy the amenities of television and radio in the sense of having sets powered by electricity. It seems fantastic that in our great cities and even in smaller towns like Maryport there are not proper electricity supplies.

I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary, unlike his predecessor, will be sympathetic and not argue about costs but say that the Ministry is anxious that the North-Western Electricity Board and boards in similar areas should go ahead quickly and that rural electrification should have a high priority from the point of view not only of the tourist industry but of the farmers and other citizens in the area, who are, after all, worthy of modern amenities.

10.56 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Power (Mr. J. C. George)

The hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Peart) has shown great pertinacity in pressing this question year after year. He has no doubt at all about the road that he wants to follow. If some hon. Members opposite are talking about "switches" in policy, he apparently is determined to carry on with his "switch on" policy.

I feel that this continuous repetition—justified, I am sure, in his own mind—could create doubt in the minds of the public and the feeling that the North Western Electricity Board is not as diligent in carrying out its duties in rural electrification as it should be. Therefore, inevitably I must go along some of the road already travelled by my predecessors.

The hon. Member knows—he said so in his speech—that the Board is not neglectful, but to convince those who might read what he has said and not know what he knows I must look at the broad general picture of rural electrification. The hon. Member must know to some extent what I am about to say, that this is a national problem and many parts of the country have the same worries as he has.

It was recognised as a national problem in 1953, and a 10 year plan for England and Wales was drawn up then. It was hoped to have 85 per cent. of all farms electrified at the end of the 10 years. The target was to be 57,000 farms and 250,000 other rural houses at the end of the first five years. Seventy per cent. of all farms and 85 per cent. of all other rural houses would then be electrified. As the hon. Members knows, the first half of the 10-year plan was completed in September, 1957, six months ahead of schedule.

I now want to bring the hon. Member right up to date. These facts he will not know. In September, 1959, over 78 per cent. of all the farms in England and Wales had a mains supply of electricity. For the purpose of comparison and to show how the North Western Board stands in this respect, on the same date 86.3 per cent. of all the farms in its area had a supply of electricity. That will demonstrate that the Board has not been slow in carrying out its plans for rural electrification. These figures are the Board's figures. I admit that, as the hon. Gentleman has pointed out, there are black spots, and Lakeland is the North Western Board's problem district.

Dealing with his point about the extension for a street in Maryport, I think he will agree that that is a matter for the Consultative Council, and I would press him to ask his local council to place it there. I am trying in general to concentrate on making the Consultative Councils real units in this industry.

Mr. Peart

The Maryport Council has taken the matter up with the people who actually do the job, the representatives of the Board in the area—not just the Consultative Council. I have correspondence to prove that.

Mr. George

I have no knowledge of the circumstances to which the hon. Member refers, hut I will look into the matter. If the Consultative Council has not been consulted, I would ask him to see that it is.

He talked about my predecessor's stressing costs. The Board is saddled with a duty to balance its accounts taking one year with another, and it has to have regard to costs. All that Sir Ian Horobin was saying was that in those circumstances, where the Board has to make ends meet it must have regard to those schemes which will bring in a reasonable return in the first place, and it must create an order of priorities in order to make sure that as far as possible its operations are remunerative. He was not saying—as the hon. Member implied—that the people in the areas for whom he was appealing had no hope of getting a supply in the future. That was not the intention of my predecessor. He was pointing out that the Board must equate its accounts, and to that extent must have regard to costs.

I shall not deal with that matter this evening; I shall try to help the hon. Member by talking mainly of his own area. He raised the question of the whole Cumberland district, but I shall confine myself to the West Lakeland district, which covers West Cumberland. First, I would make one observation on the question of costs. Rural electrification is costly; some cases show a meagre return but many cases show a very heavy loss, and the Board must make that loss good from some source. To a certain extent, therefore, other consumers are supporting rural electrification, and there is a limit to the burden they can bear. The best way to speed up rural electrification is for the consumers who are already enjoying a connection to use more electricity.

I would draw the hon. Member's attention to a recent survey of 10,000 farms, whose usage of electricity was checked. In 18 per cent. less than five units per quarter were consumed for farming purposes; in 50 per cent. less than 100 units were consumed, and in 60 per cent. less than 200 units were consumed, as compared with the average domestic consumer's usage of 466 units per quarter. If those who are connected could use more electricity, as they should, the way would be open for a better return on the money expended, and rural electrification would become more attractive economically. I hope the hon. Member will use his influence in the rural areas which are electrified to get the consumption increased, so as to assist other districts which have not got a supply yet.

Mr. Peart

Certainly I will use my influence to get them to consume more, but I expect the hon. Member to use his influence to enable some of my constituents to consume electricity who do not consume any at all yet.

Mr. George

I hope to have something to say on that later.

Returning to the general situation, the North-West is in quite a good position. The number of farms connected rose from 13,000, or 52 per cent., in March, 1948, to 21,000, or 86.3 per cent., on 30th September, 1959. The hon. Member knows the reasons for the Board's difficulties; they have been explained in many previous debates. There is the mountainous nature of the district, the sparse population in some areas, amenity difficulties, and the fact that this area was in a bad way when the Board first took over. It had not gone very far along the road of rural electrification before nationalisation.

But the Board has been pressing on. Capital development has risen steadily. In 1955–56 it was £220,000; in 1956–57, it was £240,000; in 1957–58, it was £250,000, and in 1958–59, again £250,000. The expenditure is rising and, more than that, it has been increasing under a planned scheme. The hon. Gentleman knows about the zoning scheme which was debated last year. This will ensure that money is spent with more efficiency and economy and that the zones will be taken as a whole and cleared up. Once the labour and equipment is in a zone, it will stay there until all the work in the zone is completed.

The hon. Gentleman asked for the Borrowdale area to be treated as a whole. Indeed, it is being treated now as a whole. In many cases, hopelessly uneconomic farms can be connected because of the zoning scheme, and this has the full support of the Consultative Council. The hon. Gentleman wished to know about the programme drawn up in the zoning scheme. He has seen the map showing the zones, but I will make it as simple as I can. Three stages have been agreed upon. Stage one, Frizington, near Workington, Zone 42; stage two, Cockermouth, North-West, including Maryport; stage three, Borrowdale, Buttermere and Loweswater. These are the zones which are of interest to the hon. Member.

The zoning programme was drawn up last year. There were some delays because of jobs which the Board had promised to complete by a certain date, and the work was also held up because of restrictions on capital. But more money is now available and the work is going ahead. This is the programme to date. In Zone 42, at Frizington, which is not in the hon. Gentleman's constituency, the work will be finished this month. In Zone 44, Cockermouth North-West, the work which was started in October, will be completed early in 1961. In Zone 47, Borrowdale, Buttermere and Loweswater, a start was made in November and it is hoped it will be completed in mid-1961. This leaves one small section of the old scheme on the east side of Derwentwater, from Grange to Barrow House. The Board is making an exception in this part of Zone 46 as the plant is near the district. Work will be started in the spring and it is hoped to complete it in the summer.

That is the programme up-to-date, and I feel that the hon. Gentleman may now see an end to his battle. It may be that his words have had something to do with the decisions of the Board, although I believe that he has been helped by hon. Friends of mine. I can assure him that the Minister has never interfered or tried to influence the detailed programme of the Board. He never interferes in the Board's administration in that way. I hope I have given the hon. Gentleman some satisfaction and that this will see the end of these recurring debates on the subject of Lakeland electricity.

Mr. Peart

I wish to thank the Minister. He has given me a much better reply than I have ever received before. I agree that hon. Members on both sides of the House have helped in this matter. The hon. Member for West-morland (Mr. Vane), who is now Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance, has spoken on this matter, and the hon. Member for Penrith and The Border (Mr. Whitelaw) is interested in this area. We are glad that there is progress, but the Parliamentary Secretary will agree that it is right that we should press the matter in this House because it is here that the responsibility lies.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at ten minutes past Eleven o'clock.