HC Deb 04 July 1967 vol 749 cc1573-4

3.45 p.m.

Mr. Anthony Stodart (Edinburgh, West)

I beg to move, Amendment No. 1, in page 1, line 16, at the end to insert: 'while taking into account the existing uses of land for agricultural and other purposes'. To paraphrase them, the functions of the Countryside Commission described in subsection (1) are to enable people to derive greater enjoyment from the countryside, while preserving and, if possible, enhancing the beauties of it. The Commission is instructed to keep an eye on certain matters: it must keep an eye of the potential of developing recreation and tourism, and the economic and social factors involved in so doing must be reasonably balanced.

I need not draw to the attention of the House, though, perhaps, I should draw it to the attention of the hon. Member for Fife, West (Mr. William Hamilton), that within the countryside one of our great industries does its work, and the potential for expansion in that great industry is vast indeed. Many people would go so far as to say that, with the development of scientific resources and knowledge yet to come, we may well find that we have done no more than tap the springs at this time.

I do not wish to burden the Commission with having to give the same weight of consideration to agriculture and forestry as it is invited to give to recreation and tourism, but, where a balanced view has to be taken in the development of those projects, it is equally important that a balanced view be taken in regard to them, too.

Inevitably, certain conflicts will arise. It does no injustice to the hon. Member for Motherwell (Mr. Lawson) to say that on Second Reading and in Committee he found it difficult to be convinced of the anxieties of farmers about what may happen when we have the countryside opened up to the extent proposed. It is idle to ignore that these anxieties exist. I think that there will be teething troubles, but I am confident that, given time, all will come well. I pay a tribute to the Committee for showing considerable patience in allowing me to deploy some of the arguments in our debate.

All we ask by the Amendment is that the Commission shall give thought—no more than that—when considering ideas for developing recreation and tourism to any possible consequences for the interests of agriculture and forestry.

The Minister of State, Scottish Office (Dr. J. Dickson Mabon)

I do not dissent from the view expressed on this Amendment by the hon. Member for Edinburgh, West (Mr. Stodart). It was put to us by the National Farmers' Union of Scotland, and I share the concern of the union, as hon. Members opposite do, that Scottlish agriculture should continue to flourish and that, within the framework of this Bill, we ought to give it its proper place. The Amendment, however, though I do not dissent from its spirit, is in drafting terms tautologous. It adds needless verbiage to the Bill—a principle which the hon. Gentleman has often propounded—and it is unnecessary.

Within the wording of the Clause as it stands, that is, and for the balanced economic and social development of the countryside", we have taken into account the concept in the Amendment, that is, the existing uses of land for agricultural and other purposes". I do not dissent from the principle of this and nor do the Government. That is perhaps why the hon. Gentleman has moved the Amendment, to obtain further assurances. We agree with him and think that it is taken care of. I ask him not to ask us to add these words, which are unnecessary, even though the spirit of the Amendment is very commendable.

Amendment negatived.