HC Deb 21 March 1972 vol 833 cc1328-30
16 and 42. Mr. Roy Hughes

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) if, after considering the application from Imperial Chemical Industries to dump 90,000 gallons of arsenic waste into the Bristol Channel, he will request the firm first to remove the small proportion of arsenic trioxide before the waste is dumped under the voluntary arrangements made by him;

(2) when he expects to make a decision about the application from Imperial Chemical Industries to dump 90,000 gallons of arsenic waste into the Bristol Channel.

Mr. Anthony Stodart

My Department has agreed, subject to certain conditions of disposal, to the dumping over a period of 12 months of this solution which contains a very small proportion of arsenic trioxide. I am advised that this operation will not be harmful to consumers or fisheries. Removal of the arsenic trioxide before disposal would not be warranted.

Mr. Hughes

Will the hon. Gentleman appreciate that many experts do not accept his point of view? Does he not agree, therefore, that he should take a firmer line and that, although the removal of arsenic trioxide may be more costly, people's health and well-being are far more important than the narrow pursuit of profit?

Mr. Stodart

The waste contains no more than between 1 and 4 per cent. of arsenic trioxide. The conditions for dumping are that the solution must be mixed with sewage sludge, the vessel carrying such material must move at a specified rate and workers must wear protective clothing. These are considerable safeguards.

Mr. Peter Mills

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that this is a serious problem for such beautiful holiday resorts as Clovelly and Westward Ho? Will he ask those concerned to move their slops elsewhere?

Mr. Stodart

As I have said, this has been done after agreement with the fisheries departments, and it is an area in which monitoring is being done.

Mr. Pardoe

Will the hon. Gentleman say why it is necessary for any firm to dump any arsenic waste, of whatever solution and quantity, in the Bristol Channel? By whom was the hon. Gentleman advised that this would not be harmful? How much is the firm paying for the benefit of getting rid of its waste in this way?

Mr. Stodart

I cannot answer the hon. Gentleman's last question. I am advised that this is all strictly within the terms of the Oslo Convention, which my right hon. Friend signed recently, by which arsenic requires special care where it is present in significant quantities. In fact, it is not in this case.

21. Mr. Dalyell

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he hopes to bring forward legislation on the dumping of toxic wastes in the North Sea.

Mr. Anthony Stodart

I would refer the hon. Member to my right hon. Friend's reply to his Question on 8th March when he said that the United Kingdom will take power to control dumping at sea as soon as possible.—[Vol. 832, c. 359.]

Mr. Dalyell

Has there been any Government thinking on the question of penalties since 8th March?

Mr. Stodart

Not as far as I am aware.