HC Deb 25 February 1976 vol 906 cc364-5
12. Mr. Flannery

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he is satisfied with the arrangements for public inquiries into the circumstances of the siting and building of new factories, roads, etc.; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Oakes

Yes, Sir.

Mr. Flannery

Will my hon. Friend accept from me that there are, despite his monosyllabic reply, very grave misgivings among the general public about the machinery for conducting public inquiries? Will he further accept, for instance, that I took part in an inquiry recently in my constituency about the siting of a factory, to which there was great opposition, at which a group of non-union workers, paid for two days, came down and set up a claque of such abuse that the inspector who chaired the meeting had grave difficulty in presiding? Will the Minister also accept that those men were paid off in the foyer their wages for the week, which caused a certain disquiet? Does he think that there is some—

Mr. Speaker

Order. This is a very interesting story, but it should be briefer and to the point.

Mr. Flannery

I accept your guidance, Mr. Speaker. However, does not the Minister consider that there is room for some inquiry into the way in which public inquiries generally are conducted?

Mr. Oakes

As the inspector's report in that particular case is now being considered, I cannot comment on the merits of the case or on the conduct of that inquiry. The inspector has discretion to allow anyone to make representations at planning inquiries, but it is the planning merits of the case that are important. As my hon. Friend will know, we have had certain difficulties elsewhere in Yorkshire with an inquiry, and my right hon. Friend the Minister for Planning and Local Government gave my hon. Friend the Member for Keighley (Mr. Cryer) an answer on 9th February about our proposals there.

Mr. Michael Latham

Is the Minister aware that many people are very far from satisfied with the proposals for public inquiries under the Community Land Act, and in particular the fact that people can have their property taken away under that Act without any inquiry at all?

Mr. Oakes

The hon. Gentleman was a member of the Standing Committee which considered the Bill, and he knows perfectly well that that is not correct.