HC Deb 18 February 1960 vol 617 cc1563-72

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

10.0 p.m.

Mr. Anthony Kershaw (Stroud)

I am grateful for this opportunity of bringing before the House a matter of interest to only a few people living in my constituency but which is none the less important to them. I apologise to you, Mr. Speaker, for the fact that my voice is hardly clear. I hope that my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary will be able to hear enough of what I say to enable him to give me the adequate reply which I confidently expect from him.

This matter arises because of a site in the middle of a housing estate called the Gannicox Estate near Stroud, which it is proposed to fill up by means of dumping household refuse together with spoil to make a playing field. The housing estate lies on three sides of this ancient quarry which requires to be filled up. Seventy-five of the houses which surround the site lie in such a position that the prevailing wind in that part of the world, which is a south-west wind, will blow from the proposed refuse dump towards them. The houses are extremely close. Twelve of them are within perhaps three to ten yards of the refuse dump, and the remainder are all within varying distances up to 200 yards. In the other direction—after all, the wind does not always blow in the same direction—there are a further 55 houses all equally close to the proposed dump, and a girl's technical school. All these are within 100 yards.

It is admitted on all sides that whilst the dump is being filled in there will be a substantial nuisance from the operations which are necessary to fill it. Certainly there will be smell. There will probably be rats and other forms of pests. There may be a certain amount of smoke if burning takes place. The object of filling the depression is to provide playing fields for the girls' technical school at Stroud, which stands a short distance from the site. It is said that the provision of extra playing fields for the school is a matter of extreme urgency and that no other method of filling the hole can possibly be employed except by the dumping of household refuse in it.

The provision of playing fields has been before the governors of the school for some time. It has only now been found to be a matter of such very great urgency. I believe that it is also proposed—I am not sure about this—to employ part of the spoil from the present playing field to fill this depression. That operation will put all the playing fields out of action for a certain time and will not be nearly so quick as keeping the existing fields and filling the depression with proper spoil in due course.

I believe that it is within the knowledge of my hon. Friend that immediately across the road from the girls' technical school there are the urban district council playing fields, which are not in constant use and could be utilised for the time being while the site is being filled in accordance with the plans which are to be made.

I believe that the filling of this depression with spoil and household refuse will be quite a lengthy process. I am told that it will require 100,000 cubic yards of material, which will weigh approximately 50,000 tons. It is a condition of the filling of the quarry—and I welcome this, of course—that the household refuse should be covered on each occasion by as much as 9 inches of soil. It will be necessary therefore to deposit half a ton of soil for every ton of household refuse brought in.

I suppose the minimum rate of progress for filling in this spot should be about 400 tons a week. That represents four or five large lorry loads every day. I understand that the arrangements made by the appropriate authority for filling in this depression include the provision of only one lorry, and I should like to know what happens if the lorry breaks down or the driver has 'flu, as often happens at this time of year. Are those concerned satisfied that an adequate rate of progress will be maintained over the years that the job will take?

How long will the work take? I believe it is expected to last at least two years—a substantial time—during which these residents and others will suffer great inconvenience. It might take longer—estimates of up to five years have been given to me. How long is it proposed that this filling should take?

It is not necessary from any point of view, except for the provision of playing fields, that this site should be used. Both the urban and the rural district councils have ample sites elsewhere that they are at present using, and which will not be filled in for some time to come The feeling is that this work is being undertaken entirely at the request of the county council education committee.

In an area such as the Cotswolds there should be ample spoil available to fill this site. A lot of reconstruction and other building is going on, a large amount of quarry stone is available in the neighbourhood, and there is a lot of building of schools and other premises in process. In that uneven country, where so much levelling is necessary, such work should surely provide a very large amount of spoil. Indeed, a few hundred yards a way, the Uplands Secondary School is at present being built, and will, I believe, provide some thousands of tons of suitable spoil.

Whether or not ordinary spoil could be used, or whether it is necessary also to call for household refuse, there is the point which so often unfortunately arises when private property is affected by public purpose, of whether or not adequate or fair notice has been given to those who have to bear the brunt of the public purpose.

On 17th November last, a meeting was called at the girl's technical school by the governors of the school, and I am sure they acted very rightly in calling it. The statutory notice that the site was to be filled in in the way described was issued on 9th November.

An impression—perhaps only an impression—was received by those who were affected and who attended the meeting that the decision had been taken before the meeting was called. This impression was reinforced by the fact that, so I am informed, at the meeting, it was said—I do not know by whom—that the meeting was a courtesy meeting called by the governors of the school in order to inform people likely to be affected what the proposals were. The residents were not given the impression and certainly did not understand that they had any rights arising out of the meeting or that they were able to make legal objections at that time.

The combination of these facts has given to the residents on the Gannicox Estate the impression that, by the time they were asked for their opinion and they were invited to attend the meeting on 17th November, the matter had been already decided by the county council against their immediate comfort and interests.

I want to make it quite clear that the residents on the Gannicox Estate do not for one moment say that this site should not be used for playing fields, the value and usefulness of which they fully appreciate and wish to forward. What they say is that the site should not be filled with household refuse. They believe that adequate spoil is available in the neighbourhood to fill it. They say that, if spoil were used, the job would be done more quickly and efficiently for the purpose because spoil does not need to settle in the way that household refuse does and the site could be used for playing fields much sooner. It is not denied by anybody that the site will be extremely offensive during the time when it is being filled with household refuse. The residents doubt that enough lorries are being used, and they doubt that the speed of the work will be adequate to finish the job as quickly as possible so as to obviate the nuisance in good time.

They feel also—how often does this arise in cases of this kind—that they did not have an opportunity to prepare their case. This is perhaps a small matter for the House of Commons to consider, but we must realise that, for those who live there and for those who will benefit from the playing fields in due course, it is something of personal importance. I am very glad to have the opportunity of giving public expression to the anxieties and loyalties which are felt. This is, I am sorry to say, yet another case in which, although the purpose is a good one, private persons who are about to suffer inconvenience and financial loss—for the time being their houses will be unsaleable if they wish to sell them℄feel that they have not had time adequately to make their representations, in spite of all the machinery which the House of Commons provides, in spite of the very fair treatment which local authorities always attempt to give to people placed as these residents are, and in spite of the greatest good will.

Although it is now, perhaps, rather late in the day, I have sought this opportunity to voice the objections and fears of the residents on the estate. Although they admit the very good public purposes which it is intended to achieve through the provision of playing fields, they wish that those purposes could be achieved in a way which would not cause so much inconvenience.

10.15 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government (Sir Keith Joseph)

When a household refuse tip is to be sited in the midst of housing, as is the case here, it is very understandable that local residents should be worried. It is equally understandable that their case should be as vigorously and properly put as my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Mr. Kershaw) has put it, despite the trouble with his voice. I hope to show, however, that the decision to allow this household refuse tip was taken only after the most careful deliberation and consideration of the objections made against it. All the facts which my hon. Friend has mentioned were carefully studied.

I should first explain the legal position. An application for planning permission to use this site for household refuse was made to the Gloucestershire County Council, and, since a household refuse dump is one of the uses of a site which, under Section 36 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1959, is required to be advertised as possibly an ill neighbour, the local authorities quite correctly advertised the intention to use it for this purpose. As a result, local residents were given the opportunity to object, and they very properly used that opportunity. In due course, a meeting was held, as my hon. Friend has explained, and the objectors were invited to attend. Officers of the local authorities concerned were present to hear the objectors' views and to answer questions.

After this had taken place, the local planning authority gave planning permission, but only subject to a number of conditions, some of which my hon. Friend has mentioned. The procedure laid down by Parliament was precisely followed, but I will try to meet the objections made by my hon. Friend as I go along.

The procedure having been correctly followed, my right hon. Friend has absolutely no status here except the ultimate reserve power to revoke a decision by a local planning authority. My hon. Friend will realise that this reserve power of revocation is very rarely used and that normally a local matter such as this is, by the decision of the whole House, particularly of the party to which my hon. Friend and I belong, properly left to the local authority provided that it has taken into account all local interests and objections.

I now come to the facts. The site is in the midst of a residential area. There is no argument about that, although I might question the figures given by my hon. Friend. It is true that one pair of houses is separated only by a narrow road from the extreme verge of what will be the tip, but all the other houses have a garden as well as a narrow road between them and the boundary of the tip. One of the conditions laid down by the local planning authority was that the tip should be enclosed before any tipping begins by an 8 foot high close-boarded fence. I do not believe that it is probable that that fence will be on the extreme verge of the tip. Thus there will be another few feet, probably, between the nearest house and the tip. Broadly, I accept, as my hon. Friend said, that the tip will be in the middle of a residential area, but such tips often are. This is not unique, and tips, to be usefully accessible to all local authorities in the region, are often set in the midst of residential areas.

My hon. Friend listed a number of nuisances which the tip will cause, and, although he said that some of these elements of nuisance would probably be present only while the tip was being filled, he gave the impression that some of them would continue long after it was filled. I should like to deal with them in detail. My hon. Friend spoke of smoke, rats and smell—certainly an evil mixture. But the conditions laid down by the local planning authority impose an absolute requirement, first, as I have said, to fence the site with a high close-boarded fence, secondly, to use insecticide, and thirdly, as my hon. Friend has explained, to cover with nine inches of inert material both the top and sides of the freshly tipped material every day. I can assure my hon. Friend that the local authorities concerned intend to use a bulldozer to flatten, scrape and cover the material, so that no interstices shall be left in which any live animals, including rodents, can hide themselves.

An additional precaution laid down in the conditions imposed by the local planning authority is that no lorry leaving the site shall be able to take out any of the household refuse on its wheels, and thus infect the road. There is to be an area of clean, hard standing, and an arrangement to clean or scrape the wheels of any lorries leaving the site, so that the neighbouring roadway will not have any household refuse spread upon it. I am assured that there are other refuse dumps of this sort, and from the conditions imposed there is no reason to fear that even during the construction there will be any more inconvenience from this site than would arise in the course of any normal building, site levelling, site filling or clearance operation. Once the tip has been finished the neighbourhood should be improved, as my hon. Friend recognised, by the desirable prospect of a playing field. I would hate to list to my hon. Friend the number of public and private buildings which today stand upon the refuse heaps of centuries in the towns of England.

I have tried to deal with the nuisance element, and I turn now to the fact that the site itself was not a place of admirable amenity even before this project was planned. I gather that it was used for unauthorised tipping, though not necessarily household tipping. It was used as a poultry run, and is of a rather derelict and untended appearance. As my hon. Friend has recognised, the area will he much improved when the job has been completed.

He also recognises, and says that his constituents recognise, that the object is a commendable one. What his constituents object to is the inconvenience, especially during the filling process, and he rightly asks how long this will take. He has his main figure correct. It is thought that the tip will take about 100,000 cubic yards of refuse, but this will involve not, as my hon. Friend thought 50,000 tons; it will involve about 25,000 tons of refuse, and it will therefore take a shorter time to fill, because it is expected that about 200 tons of household refuse will be deposited each week, instead of the 400 tons that he expected, and that 200 tons will occupy between 800 and 1,000 cubic yards. The operation will therefore take between two and two and a half years, and after that time the refuse tip will have been filled.

My hon. Friend has not been correctly informed about the lorry situation. The tip will be served by eight lorries, five of the rural district council and three of the urban district council, so that there should be ample provision both to deposit the 200 tons and to look after any occasional sickness of the drivers.

There are two main reasons for this tip. The first is that a tip is needed. My hon. Friend did not deal with that question in detail; he said he thought that there were plenty of other sites in that area. The fact is that the tips at present in use both by the urban and the rural district council are rapidly being used up, and they have decided that the site they have selected is the most accessible and convenient—and they know the area extremely well.

The second reason is the universally commended reason of acquiring an additional playing field. My hon. Friend wonders whether this second reason could have been achieved equally well by accepting normal builders' spoil. The fact is that if this were done it would take a great deal longer than two years, because there is not a sufficient supply of builders' spoil lying about to provide anything like the material needed to fill the area of the tip. The local building operations have themselves consumed a lot of their own spoil in a cut and fill operation.

My hon. Friend referred to the meeting which took place. Of course, there is every reason to think that the local planning authority had received a detailed plan of operations from the district council and that, therefore, the objectors were faced with a well-thought-out scheme of action. That does not in any way mean, however, that they were faced with a ready-made decision. Their objections were listened to.

The long list of conditions imposed by the local planning authority showed that those objections were carefully listened to. Indeed, had there not been a detailed plan in the minds of the local planning authority, the objectors would, quite rightly, have been able to say that it was a half-baked scheme and that nobody had even thought it out. It is, therefore, unfair to blame the local planning authority and the local authorities for having a well-thought-out scheme. It does not follow that the objections were not seriously considered.

As a result of all this, it seems to me to be essentially a local matter properly decided by the procedure laid down by Parliament in the full light of publicly-advertised warning and careful study of the objections properly made by local residents. It will solve for two years the local problem of finding a refuse tip for household refuse. Any inconvenience that might be thought to arise from it during the two years has been adequately protected against by the conditions imposed, and at the end of the time a universally welcomed playing field will permanently grace the site.

I very much hope that my hon. Friend will agree that this is essentially a local matter, that in the light of what I have tried to explain it was a local matter properly studied and properly decided and that it is now up to the local authority properly to enforce the conditions and preserve the amenities of the neighbourhood.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly as twenty-seven minutes past Ten o'clock.