HC Deb 31 January 1973 vol 849 cc1416-29

6.18 p.m.

Mr. Caerwyn E. Roderick (Brecon and Radnor)

I should like for a few moments to discuss grants for reclamation and derelict land in development and intermediate areas under an additional programme within the provisions of the Local Employment Act 1972. This item relates to Class VI, Vote 4, Subhead F4(4), and involves provision for additional expenditure amounting to £800,000.

I wish to concentrate on two matters. The Minister will know from correspondence which we have exchanged that a water board in my constituency is anxious to undertake schemes which would improve the appearance of areas of their land. The board would like to have financial assistance in the form of grants under the heading which we are now discussing, but it has been told that grants are given only to county, county borough or district councils—that is to say, only to local authorities. My plea is that these grants should be extended to public bodies, such as water boards, the National Coal Board, the railways, and other public bodies. This would enable those public bodies to involve themselves in the clearance of derelict land.

The board which drew my attention to this matter has abandoned some sources of water supply and taken on new sources. It would like to restore those abandoned areas either to their original state or certainly to improve their appearance.

It is a pity that we do not do all in our power to help boards which are anxious to do this work. The board has been told that it ought to try to persuade local authorities in that area to get on with the job and that they would be eligible for grant.

On 23rd May last my hon. Friend the Member for Pontypridd (Mr. John) asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will take steps to grant annual sums to the nationalised industries to be devoted towards the restoration of land made derelict by their operations on the cessation of their operations The answer was: Generous grants are available to local authorites towards the cost of acquisition of derelict land, and then reclamation whoever the original owner may be. There is no reason why the acquisition procedure should not be applied to land belonging to nationalised industries in respect of which no requirements for restoration had been imposed under the Town and Country Planning Acts."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 23rd May 1972; Vol. 837, c. 353–4.] I quote that deliberately to anticipate an answer that the Minister will possibly give to my argument. I appreciate that answer has already been given, but I bring up this subject anew because there is great force in the argument.

If the water board assisted the local authority financially the grant would be payable only on the reduced figure. There fore, the local authority would always have to find a sum of money, and the water board could not make up the difference.

I am anxious that the help should not be given to the water board because its main income is often derived far away from the point at which the water is stored. If a board is prepared to spend money which it has collected in one area on another area we should encourage it to do so at all costs. The area where the water is stored is virtually always rural and is usually a poor area. Therefore, priority is not given to work of this kind as the authorities cannot afford it. We should do all in our power to ensure that water boards involve themselves in the work.

I am also concerned for the future under the new structure of local government and the new water boards with which we are likely to be faced. They will be much larger bodies. Will they be as concerned over small local projects to clear derelict land as existing bodies? It would be an advantage to have two spearheads attacking this problem—not only the councils but other bodies, like water authorities.

I have confined my remarks in the main to water authorities, but what I have said would equally apply to British Rail and the National Coal Board in other spheres. Having more than one agency operating in this work would be of tremendous advantage.

British Rail has many abandoned railway stations which have been allowed to become derelict eyesores for far too long. An example in my constituency is Torpantau. The Minister will know that this is a very beautiful area but there is this eyesore of an abandoned railway station. Again, the station at Builth Road is now only half-used. The other half is a mess and needs clearing up. We ought to encourage British Rail to do something about the problem.

There are schemes that the Coal Board could undertake. The dereliction that we suffer in so many areas—Glamorgan and Monmouthshire in particular—has not been of the local authorities' making. Yet they are to be responsible for clearing it up. The Coal Board should do something about this problem. I accept that at times assistance is provided by the Coal Board, but it should be its job entirely with Government assistance in the form of grants such as local authorities now receive.

I do not expect the Minister to give an undertaking today that the Government will take up this matter. Obviously he will not have power to do that. However, I hope that we can extract from him a promise to impress upon the Government the need to amend legislation so that what we are seeking can take place.

My second point concerns the global sum available for improvements and clearance of derelict land. Although the sums allocated are increasing each year, there is a danger that we will make insufficient progress. It appears that, as with most projects, the simpler and thus the cheaper projects will have been tackled first. That means that the schemes now coming on will be more costly. Furthermore, schemes will automatically be more costly because of inflation. So, with these factors in mind, I think it would be dangerous to think that, because the Estimates allow for about twice the figure of three years ago, that much more is being done.

The Minister of State, Welsh Office (Mr. David Gibson-Watt)

Will the hon. Gentleman make clear to me and to the House whether he is now referring to derelict land clearance or to the "Operation Eyesore" programme?

Mr. Roderick

I am thinking particularly of derelict land reclamation. I recognise that greater sums are to be spent in this area. However, increasing costs and the increasing complexity of clearance schemes make them so much more costly. Therefore, the amount to be spent on this work does not necessarily mean that more land is being cleared. It may be marginally extra.

In this day and age, with our experience over the last few years, we ought to be racing ahead with schemes, not just increasing them marginally. I recognise that we are spending more, but more should be done. The whole concept of the clearance of derelict land having grown up and so much having been learned, we ought to be racing ahead. The extra expenditure is partly forced upon us to create jobs. So, all in all, we are not increasing expenditure through enlightenment of this problem. If we are serious about this matter I contend that greater sums needs to be spent in forthcoming years.

6.28 p.m.

Mr. Raymond Gower (Barry)

I should like to make a few comments on what has been said by the hon. Member for Brecon and Radnor (Mr. Roderick). I apologise for the fact that I was delayed for a short time when the hon. Member began his speech.

I accept a good deal of what the hon. Gentleman said about the need for greater expenditure on the clearance of derelict land, but I think he will agree that the figures represent not only an increase in monetary terms, but, even allowing for the changed value of money, a substantial increase in absolute and real terms.

Mr. Roderick

I should point out to the hon. Gentleman that this was almost an aside in my speech. The main purport of my argument was on another issue entirely.

Mr. Gower

The hon. Gentleman, towards the end of his speech, commented on this point. I support the main import of what he said. I put it to the Minister that whereas these sums may seem real, substantial and increasing, the need for derelict land clearance in Wales is aggravated more than in most parts of the United Kingdom.

I accept that there is dereliction in other parts of the United Kingdom—for example, parts of the Black Country and the North-East of England. The hon. Gentleman, like myself, has seen dereliction in parts of Durham, Northumberland and Scotland. I do not deny that. But the overpowering effect of dereliction in parts of South Wales, in particular, is such that there is a major need, if we wish to make the Principality beautiful, for reclamation to take place. It is a fact that some of the worst disfigurement has occurred in areas which were originally of great natural beauty. My hon. Friend will be aware of the beauty that existed perhaps 200 years ago in the valleys which led up from the South Wales coast towards Brecon and Radnorshire. They must have been extraordinarily beautiful. It is possible that we can look forward to a time when a lot of that beauty will be recreated.

An effort is now being made by agencies in Wales to promote the growth of tourism, which is of such great value to the Welsh economy. Disfigurement is a disadvantage when seeking to promote tourism, and to that extent I support what has been said by the hon. Gentleman. I have developed a part of his argument which, as he said, was not his main theme. However, I feel that the matter I have raised is of tremendous importance. I am sure that my hon. Friend has the matter in mind. I hope that he will not mind my underlining it.

6.32 p.m.

Mr. William Edwards (Merioneth)

I wish to return to the main and valid point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon and Radnor (Mr. Roderick). I shall refer to two particular aspects so far as they affect development areas in North Wales and the water boards.

First, there is a difference between the old-established water boards which were established by small authorities and the kind of water authorities that we may have in a county like mine where large tracts of land were acquired by outside authorities. In those cases I should not like to encourage water boards to extend or develop their own domains and to do work which should be done by local authorities. I should like to see the water boards encouraged to hand back the land which is surplus to their requirements to the local authority in whose area they operate. I shall not make specific references as I do not want to prolong the debate. However, I think that that is a way in which the water boards should be guided by the Welsh Office. The land which they do not need for their essential operation should be handed back to the local authorities.

There is a major contribution to be made by British Rail. I hope that the Minister will not take that as an indication that I want the whole of the Cambrian coast to be declared derelict land. However, there are large areas, not only within my constituency but elsewhere, which require attention. It is sad to see that concurrent with the improvement of the operation of British Rail there remains the dereliction which has taken place and which has been allowed to remain at our stations. It has happened because British Rail's property department is never equal to the efficiency of its passenger operation department.

I do not think that any encouragement to deal with derelict land should be given to British Rail. British Rail's costing system is out of this world. For example, it said that it would cost £3,000 to improve a bridge in my constituency for one season only. In fact, the whole of the work was done by my local authority for £800. I should not like to encourage British Rail to undertake the task of land clearance.

We should encourage British Rail to dispose of its surplus land. It should hand it back to the local authorities on condition that should it need it again for the modernisation or improvement of its railway system it could have it back. Some of the stations in Wales are a disgrace. There is derelict land alongside the stations which British Rail do not use and never will use in the foreseeable future. I should like the Minister to ask the boards to make a contribution towards the valuable and important programme that was started by the last Labour Government.

6.35 p.m.

Mr. G. Elfed Davies (Rhondda, East)

I wish to refer to a problem with which the Minister is familiar. For six years the Rhondda Borough Council, the Welsh Office and the Coal Board have been negotiating for the removal of an ugly tip which is known in my part of the world as the Banana Tip of Ferndale. In fact, the matter was settled and an imaginative scheme was agreed upon. But, because the Coal Board suddenly found it did not need the coal which would be reclaimed, the cost has become exorbitant. Consequently, a worthwhile scheme is being lost.

Something appears to be radically wrong. Are we to reach a situation where the Coal Board can sterilise a nasty, ugly and vicious tip because at the moment it does not want the coal? That approach could apply to many other similar tips throughout South Wales. My hon. Friend the Member for Brecon and Radnor (Mr. Roderick) urged that some consideration should be given to the abhorrences that receive grants. If the scheme to which I have referred was adopted without the Coal Board's help it would cost one half of the total amount of money which is coming to Wales for this sort of work. If a worthwhile scheme is not to be lost, is not it about time that the amount of available money was increased? I hope that the Minister will have another serious look at the problem which I have mentioned because the people of Rhondda are very concerned about the matter.

6.38 p.m.

The Minister of State, Welsh Office (Mr. David Gibson-Watt)

I am glad to rise to answer this short but valuable debate. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Brecon and Radnor (Mr. Roderick) for initiating it. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Barry (Mr. Gower) for underlining the importance of tourism. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Merioneth (Mr. William Edwards) who spoke of the importance of the possible disposal of land which is surplus to British Rail's requirements. The hon. Gentleman said that some of the land is becoming an eyesore in Wales. Obviously I cannot comment further than to say that I have taken his message on board. I feel certain that what he has said will be read by those responsible.

The hon. Member for Rhondda, East (Mr. G. Elfed Davies), as he rightly said, has had a number of meetings with his constituents and myself about the important and difficult question of the Banana Tip. It has been an extraordinarily baffling and difficult problem to answer. Nobody would have been happier than I to have sent him away with a helpful answer in view of all that he has done for his constituents and the councillors concerned, who are day to day faced with the complaints and protests of their constituents.

The hon. Gentleman referred to the Coal Board's attitude. All that I shall say in defence of the Coal Board is that markets of various sorts change from day to day and the sort of coal which would have been coming from the Banana Tip is unfortunately in over-supply today. It is not merely a question of production; it is also a question of consumption of this type of fuel by the Central Electricity Generating Board. We shall continue to look at the matter and try to help, but it is very difficult.

The Special Environmental Assistance Scheme, popularly called "Operation Eyesore", was launched by the Government in 1972. Its basic aim was to create more employment by carrying out minor schemes of environmental improvement. The invitation was extended to local authorities to submit schemes which, when approved, would attract central Government grant at the rate of 85 per cent. in the Welsh Development Area and 75 per cent. elsewhere in the Principality. This assistance was available in respect of work carried out before 30th June 1973. Basically it was intended to improve the appearance of neglected and unsightly land and to bring it into beneficial use.

The scheme has been a resounding success. The reduction in the level of unemployment against the normal seasonal trends must in part be due to the success of the scheme. The expenditure and injection of £4 million by the Government and local government must have had its effect, not only in employment opportunities created by contractors or by men employed by local authorities on the various sites, but, to a minor extent, in the ancillary services producing such things as concrete pipes used in culverting streams and the maintenance of plant and machinery. It is clear therefore that some employment opportunities have been created.

But equally important is the effect which the scheme is having on improving the environment. I want to give credit to the speed with which local authorities' members and officers have grasped this opportunity. I have served in local government myself, and I remember that we were pretty quick to move at a focal authority level if we considered that the Government were offering us money for a worthwhile object. Whether the schemes have been prepared by engineers, surveyors or planners of the various authorities, or whether by using the services of private consultants, it is remarkable that the derelict land unit of the Welsh Office has considered over 1,400 schemes in the last year.

Undoubtedly the level of grant aid from the Government has made the scheme attractive to local authorities and it is seen as a joint partnership. The short term effect is considerable, but it is the long term benefits to our people in Wales and to their quality of life and living about which the Government are concerned. For too long parts of Wales have been despoiled and even where improvements have been made there is of course the problem of vandalism. Vandalism is not confined to the young. Adults who dump cars, mattresses, bedsteads and builders' rubble are vandals as well. This is a problem which can be overcome over the years only by a process of education in its widest sense.

If people live in the shadows of colliery spoil tips or slate quarry wasters they deserve even more to have their local environment improved. By clearing the industrial dereliction, by the scheme of environmental improvement about which I am speaking, by the creation of general improvement areas and slum clearance areas under the housing Acts, together with the grants available for house improvements, then and only then will people become fully conscious that there is something to be safeguarded and nurtured.

I have mentioned that over 1,400 schemes have already been approved and every part of the Principality has benefited. It is true to say that every constituency represented by Welsh Members has had a share. While the environment requires considerable uplift in the industrial areas, nevertheless rural centres have also been included within the scheme. When the scheme was introduced, it was clear that it would be impossible to produce a comprehensive list of work which would be eligible. We said that each case would be considered on its merits; but we gave certain examples of the kind of work that the scheme was intended to cover—clearing up untidy plots or bomb sites; cleaning and painting buildings where their existing condition was unsightly; clearing up disused allotments; the removal of debris from the beds of rivers or canals and the improvement of banks and towpaths; and, finally, the planting of trees to improve the appearance of drab and unsightly areas.

While local authorities would probably have chosen to concentrate on properties in their own ownership, nevertheless, where land was privately owned or was part of a nationalised concern, providing the agreement of the owner was forthcoming the scheme could go forward. Where appropriate, a contribution from such private owners was sought where there was likely to be some significant benefit to them.

The hon. Member for Brecon and Radnor referred to the proposals for the North Breconshire and Radnorshire Water Board. As he said, I wrote to him about this matter on 19th January, and perhaps the House will bear with me if I quote what I said: Grant aid for both the reclamation of derelict land and for Special Environmental Assistance Schemes is given only to local authorities, although that need not prevent statutory undertakings from benefiting from the schemes. If there are any instances where the Radnorshire and North Breconshire Water Board wish to take advantage of the assistance given under the schemes they can approach the District or County Council concerned, asking them to submit the proposals to the Welsh Office on the Board's behalf. It would, of course, he up to the Board to convince the local authority of the worth of the scheme because the local authority would have to bear 15 per cent. of the cost. Should the Board wish to discuss any specific proposals, I suggest that they contact my officials of the Derelict Land Unit who will be pleased to advise them. That advice still stands, and I am glad to be able to refer to it publicly in the House today.

While all the examples I have given have been considered, many unusual projects were considered and accepted, such as the clearance of the scars resulting from war-time structures and the clearance and treatment of disused burial grounds and churchyards. I congratulate the various church authorities of all denominations which co-operated with the local authorities in these imaginative schemes. Let me pick out a few examples that may interest hon. Gentlemen.

Towards the end of the year—and I see that the hon. Member for Aberdare (Mr. Probert) is in his place—a service of thanksgiving was held in St. John's Church, Aberdare, an area which is a focal point for the town. The original churchyard was cluttered with headstones and overgrown. But for a cost of some £5,000 the area has been transformed by the removal of the headstones to the boundary wall, which enabled the area to be landcaped, and seats for the general public were provided by the local authority. I believe that the inhabitants of Aberdare are overjoyed by this improvement.

Another scheme which will show benefits over the years is the dredging and clearance of weeds in the Crumlin arm of the Monmouthshire Canal, which traverses the areas of Risca, Magor and St. Mellons and Newport Borough. About £70,000 will be spent on this.

A highly imaginative scheme, drawn up by consultant landscape architects, briefed by Wrexham Rural District Council, to improve the situation in the parish of Cefn Mawr has cost £100,000 and consists of 90 minor schemes. The local residents were consulted in the type of improvement they required.

At Haverfordwest, the river bank and surrounding areas of the Cleddau will benefit from a joint scheme submitted by the Pembrokeshire County Council and Haverfordwest Borough Council. Glamorgan County Council has been responsible, in an agency capacity on some schemes, for a large number of schemes throughout the county area and, as befits our major international airport, some worthwhile improvement has been made at Rhoose Airport.

In Mid Wales, there have been improvements to the river walks in Brecon and Llanidloes and in Newton a scheme devised by the Newtown Development Corporation adjoining the River Severn improvement scheme will produce great benefits.

Many Members and local authorities, stimulated by the Civic Trust, have written asking for an extension of the scheme, and this is presently being considered. I can say no more about this today. But at least this pressure underlies the success of the scheme and the impact it has already made upon the environment in such a short time. I repeat that I am grateful to the hon. Member for Brecon and Radnor for raising this most important subject this afternoon.

6.50 p.m.

Mr. Elystan Morgan (Cardigan)

I apologise to the Minister of State for speaking after him. It is in no way my intention to be censorious of anything he has said. I merely wish to mention two matters which I would have raised before he spoke had I myself not been tardy in rising.

We are all indebted to my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon and Radnor (Mr. Roderick) for introducing a subject which is of very considerable importance to Wales—one of the most beautiful places upon earth but a place which still bears thousands of scars inflicted on it by the exploitation of industry. I am sure that hon. Members on both sides accept that the work done from 1967 onwards in relation to dereliction is one of the most inspiring and satisfying records of successive Governments over the last six years.

My first point relates to derelict stations, of which in Wales we have many hundreds, on railway lines which still provide passenger services. In some cases there are many of us who would say that there was no good case for such closure. On some lines one can discern a pattern of deliberate running down of the services over the years preceding the coup de grace when the Railways Board demonstrates to the transport users consultative committee that the station concerned is making a monumental loss. In some other cases many of us would have sympathy with the decision of the board to close stations many years ago. In so doing it was able very greatly to reduce the journey time and, indeed, to make that stretch of line more attractive.

When these stations were closed the communities they served were very small and the contribution to railway finances was minimal. Now, perhaps 10 or 20 years after those closures, many of the communities have completely changed their character. There has been considerable development in the area. The fact that a small station—or even a large station—was closed years ago should not mean that it is a decision taken for all time.

I ask the Minister to use his good offices to draw the attention of toe Board to many such cases—I have two or three in mind in the Aberystwyth-Shrewsbury area, where there are lines which at the moment very much wish to increase their passenger turnover. Let the board know that there is a splendid opportunity to do this by reopening certain stations where there has been considerable growth in those communities and where there is now great potential of good will to he exploited if they were to become active again.

My second point is a purely constituency matter. One does not think of Cardiganshire as being an area that bears many of the scars of dereliction that have been mentioned in the debate, but I refer now particularly to the dereliction we suffer as a result of lead mining up to about 30 or 40 years ago. The Minister of State will know that on many occasions I have raised the subject of the poisoning of two very important rivers, the Ystwyth and the Rheidol. There have been many splendid pioneering developments over the last 20 or 30 years to make these living rivers once again and to combat the pollution from lead and zinc poisoning which have bedevilled them over the years. Some of that poisoning still flows into the rivers from the flooding of the mine adits.

I should be very grateful if the Welsh Office would use its good offices, with other Government Departments to give advice to the appropriate bodies, and see whether there is any assistance which local authorities in the area can give to help combat what is admittedly a small in scale but nevertheless a very pertinent consideration of pollution in relation to a county which at the moment happily does not face the problems which so many hon. Members have mentioned.

Mr. Gibson-Watt

The hon. Member for Cardigan (Mr. Elystan Morgan) has raised two very important points. I must point out that to some extent this debate is limited to Class VI, Vote 4, F 4(4), though this in no way diminishes the importance of what lie has said. On the railway point, I can only refer to what I said to his hon. Friend the Member for Merioneth (Mr. William Edwards). On the hon. Gentleman's second point, I can only say that if there is any specific and serious matter in relation to this very difficult question of lead poisoning of rivers, I shall be happy to pursue it if he takes it up in correspondence.