WATER [MONEY] (Hansard, 5 February 1973)

§ Mr. John Farr (Harborough)
I should like to make some reference to this resolution. I wish to deal with some of the financial effects of the Bill, should it be enacted.
In Clause 29, so far as I can see, a considerable number of existing authori- 162 ties which are maintained at the Exchequer's expense are to be abolished. Clause 29 includes such bodies as the Water Resources Board, the Central Advisory Water Committee, all river authorities, the Conservators of the River Thames and the Lee Conservancy Catchment Board, the Isle of Wight River and Water Authority and many others including all joint sewerage boards, all of which are to be abolished.
Whether or not one agrees that it is a good idea to dispose of the services of these different authorities—and I personally have grave doubts whether all of them should be abolished, and certainly the Water Resources Board has done a first-class job—the fact remains that the removal of these bodies listed in Clause 29 and its subsections will mean a considerable saving——

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Robert Grant-Ferris)
I must draw the hon. Member's attention to the fact that we are discussing the Money Resolution, and anything outside its terms is out of order. These matters could have been discussed on Second Reading. Unfortunately, the hon. Member for Harborough (Mr. Farr) was unable to be called, but I hope he will not take advantage of the situation and will keep to the terms of the Money Resolution.

§ Mr. Farr
That is exactly what I intend to do, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I was merely pointing out that Clause 29 lists a considerable number of existing authorities which will be abolished once the Bill is enacted. One would imagine that in certain respects a saving will accrue to the Treasury. Some of these authorities will become the responsibility of the new regional water authorities, but we see from Clause 29(a) mention of the Water Resources Board——

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
The clause of which the hon. Gentleman is speaking, Clause 25, is not affected by the Money Resolution.

Mr. Fan
With great respect, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I was referring to Clause 163 29 which lists those authorities which are to be abolished. I was saying that I thought there would be a considerable saving.

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
If the hon. Gentleman can show me how Clause 29 is covered by the Money Resolution, I shall gladly allow him to proceed.

§ Mr. Farr
It affects the resolution in that, with the abolition of the Water Resources Board, the money at present spent on that board and its works will no longer be required. I was trying to ascertain how such savings as the House may expect to be made by the passing of this Bill will be put to good use. I was saying that the saving which will ensue when the Water Resources Board——

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
No. I am afraid that this will not do. The hon. Gentleman must relate what he says entirely to the Money Resolution. Certain matters are in order. Certain others are not. So far, I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman is not in order.

§ Mr. Farr
I bow at once to what you say, Mr. Deputy Speaker.
I turn, then, to another aspect. Before we pass this Money Resolution I hope that the House will consider its contents and whether sufficient finance is likely to be available for research and development work in connection with water and various forms of water supply and conservation. I have in mind especially the considerable sums of money needed for research and development into desalination. It is a topic which must be covered by the terms of the resolution.
My reason for raising this matter is that the country spends less on research and development into various forms of desalination——

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
Order. Will the hon. Gentleman help me? Will he indicate the exact words in the resolution to which he is referring?

§ Mr. Farr
I think that my remarks are more than amply covered by paragraph (b) of the resolution. That being the case, it is imperative for adequate sums to be made available for research and development into desalination processes. Germany, France, America and 164 Italy all spend considerably more on desalination than we do. As we led the field at one time and as we shall be very short of water from conventional sources in a few years, it is imperative for us to be satisfied that ample money will be made available for a continuance of British work in this respect.
Adequate research and development into new desalination processes is a subject which requires the expenditure of a great deal of money. Last autumn the Water Resources Board pointed out in its report that to obtain fresh water from salt by the now known methods of desalination the average cost was two or three times that of the present conventional methods. In the document accompanying the Bill, the Government said that they would be quite happy to allow any future development in desalination to be covered by a committee of the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority, with a small amount of laboratory research.
I suggest that this is not adequate. Sooner or later we shall have to face the fact that with the shortage of land and the forthcoming shortage of fresh water we cannot leave research and development on such a vital matter to a committee of the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority.
I hope to be assured by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State that adequate sums will be forthcoming for the research and development which will be needed in the next two decades if Britain is to keep in the forefront of all the different methods of de-salting sea water.

§ The Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Eldon Griffiths)
I am in some difficulty. I should like to give my hon. Friend the Member for Harborough (Mr. Farr) the assurance that he seeks, but I should be out of order if I did. Therefore, I will say "Yes" to him and go to the terms of the Money Resolution, which is relatively straightforward.
This is a machinery Bill and, as the Financial Memorandum indicates, it is not expected that reorganisation as such will lead to any significant changes in the total expenditure on water resources in the short term, while in the longer term it should lead to economies, though the House will understand that I cannot attempt to quantify those tonight.
165 Items (a)(i) and (ii) are in common form and essentially repeat the terms of Clause 33. Item (a)(ii) is a safeguarding provision covering any increase attributable to the provisions of that Act in the sums payable out of moneys so provided under any other enactment". This is a narrow point. It is conceivable, though quite improbable, that local authorities may incur expenditure as a result of the Bill—for example, in discharging the duty under Clause 10(3) to take such steps from time to time as may be necessary for ascertaining the sufficiency and wholesomeness of water supplies within their area". By increasing the aggregate revenue expenditure of local authorities by what could conceivably be an infinitesimal sum and recognising that that aggregate expenditure may need to be taken into account in determining the level of Exchequer grant, this increase could indirectly increase marginally the amount of rates support grant. This provision covers that remote and improbable contingency.
Item (a)(iii) covers the payment of any grants made by the Secretary of State to water authorities established under that Act". This essentially allows him, with the approval of the Treasury, to pay grant to a water authority, if he so decides, to give the water authority a direction as to the purpose for which the grant is to be used.
Items (b), (c), (d) and (e) relate respectively to Clause 34(2) and (4) and Clause 35(3) and (5). These deal in standard terms with the making of loans by, and their repayment to, the National Loans Fund, through the Secretary of State, and with payments by the Treasury out of the Consolidated Loan Fund under any guarantee of water authority or National Water Council borrowings from 166 persons other than the Secretary of State. They also cover arrangements for the refund of those payments under guarantee to the Treasury.
The Money Resolution puts no limit on these amounts. It is, as I said at the outset, a formal though none the less not unimportant recommendation. I hope that with the brief monosyllabic assurance I was able to give my hon. Friend the House will accept the Financial Resolution.