§ Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Mather.]
11.42 pm§ Mr. David Amess (Basildon)The main thrust of my debate is to plead with my hon. Friend the Minister to halt any plans that he and the Department of the Environment might have further to develop the south-west part of Basildon. Before I outline my reasons for the request, I pay tribute to the chairman of the development corporation, Dame Elizabeth Coker, her general manager, Mr. Douglas Galloway, and all the officers and staff of the corporation, who have shown tenacity and dedication in trying to build a town of which we can be truly proud and, despite many obstacles, trying to attract businesses to the area to provide employment for people in the town. Although mistakes may have been made, Basildon has the potential to become the show town of Britain.
I am not sure who said, "Enough is enough", but if anyone has not claimed the phrase perhaps I could claim it tonight. Enough is enough for the people of Basildon. The new town, which is the largest in the country, was built primarily to cater for the overspill from London—a dream town. It was never intended that we should reproduce the conditions of overcrowding and high-density dwellings that existed in London. I warn my hon. Friend the Minister that, if development in south-west Basildon is allowed to continue, we shall lose what precious little remaining beautiful countryside we have. Many people have said to me that the rest of Essex is proud of its countryside and is most reluctant that building should spoil it. Of course, it is said, it is all right to keep developing Basildon. Well, it is not all right to keep developing Basildon. We also want to protect our countryside.
What is this master plan that we hear about morning, noon and night? One minute it is for 50,000 people, then for 80,000, then for 90,000 and then for 130,000. What the devil are we going to do—relocate the whole of the United Kingdom in Basildon? If that is the case, I shall certainly need some assistance in representing those constituents. The battle to stop the rape of Langdon hills started with the publication of the south-west area plan in 1973. There was massive public opposition to it, and a public inquiry was set up and resulted in the south-west area plan being drastically modified.
However, there is still the intention to build 950 houses on approximately 75 acres lying between Berry lane and Western avenue. That immediately begs the question where the local jobs are to come from, when one considers the already too high level of unemployment in the area, particularly with the recent closure of Carreras Rothman.
Just a short distance from where these houses are planned lies a space that rests on Essex clay, which, because of the number of trees that have been cut down, is heaving as the water table alters. Over 800 properties in Basildon are being monitored for upheaval. People who live on these estates suffer many problems, not least of which is the need for the underpinning of their property.
Even after properties have been underpinned, many people are most reluctant to return to them. The tenants' ability to purchase these properties under the right to buy is hindered because of the reluctance of companies to insure them. Added to this are the heating problems. The 994 district heating system that is being operated is expensive and of poor quality. Near these properties lies the Siporex estate, built of an untried material wished on Basildon by an administration anxious to put up as many units as possible. It cracks as one walks on it, and now most properties must have the entire first floor replaced. Surely, if anyone needs rehousing, these people should have priority.
The building of these new houses means that still more of our countryside will be destroyed. Beautiful trees taking decades to mature will be bulldozed, forests will be destroyed and the natural wildlife—badgers, birds and foxes—driven out.
The local authority is not helping, but then, it never does. With its lack of respect for the countryside, it intends to build the Lee Chapel north business park, and in so doing will destroy 30 acres of beautiful woodland and drive out yet more wildlife. Exactly across the road from this woodland are 30-odd acres that have been described as prime industrial land and nominated as such in the master plan. This area is tatty scrubland and lies next door to an industrial estate. There is no reason why the business park should not be built there.
The most amazing U-turn by the local authority has just occurred with a decision to sell over an acre of previously unspoilt countryside for private development in Lee Chapel lane. This land is zoned under the new town master plan as being for open space, agriculture or recreation—what hypocrisy. I have received many representations from residents concerning plans to further develop the south-west part of Basildon. Their fears are well founded and far-ranging. The very disruption to the daily lives of residents while construction work is being carried cut should not be taken lightly.
I received a petition signed by a number of residents the other day concerning the proposals to run a bus through a quiet residential turning in Shakespeare avenue—not just around it but through it. This seems an extraordinary decision, when the bus could run at the end of the turning and along the new main road. Whilst many residents naturally would appreciate a bus service, the siting of it has led to anxiety about noise, disruption and danger to young children.
Further representations have been made to me about the use of compulsory purchase orders to bulldoze a way into the south-west, as is happening in another part of the town, in Pitsea on the Burnt Mills estate. The compulsory purchase orders force those who have struggled hard to acquire and maintain their properties to forsake ownership. Many elderly plot land owners gained ownership of land following the war and will be anguished at its loss under the CPOs.
In the area of south-west Basildon now planned for development, are many plots, seven of which have dwellings upon them. My constituents wish to live out the latter part of their lives in the environment into which they have put so much. I ask the Minister to ensure that my constituents are allowed the right to choose whether to sell, with no duress or compulsion. In any case, the existence of those remaining properties would not interfere with the planned development. My contention is that they would add to the character of the area.
A further complaint about the acquisition of properties has been about the unfairness of compensation. The district valuer is supposed to give the market value in 995 compensation for loss of property. However, many claim that the system is unfair since often the amounts awarded in settlement are lower than the true market value.
I have been told that the reason for the present rather inhumane serving of CPOs on people is pressure from the Civil Service to speed up the process of acquisition. Perhaps the Minister will comment on that. A number of people believe that the rules have been changed with the development of Basildon.
Although the Secretary of State for the Environment has made recent statements on the green belts which have pleased and reassured many, we have not been pleased in Basildon. We feel rather left out and uncertain of our future. Many believe that Basildon is being discriminated against in the county structure plan. While other areas of Essex county are protected against disruption from further development in consideration of their attractive natures, Basildon's fine qualities are not apparently held in such esteem. Its citizens are therefore forced to suffer.
I believe that the intention is eventually to adjust the green belt to meet regional housing needs — whatever they might be. The Langdon Hills and District Conservation Society has fought long and hard over the years and has met with some measure of success.
The crucial point is that in the south-west of Basildon is a lot of open space for which we are thankful, but none of it is protected. There is nothing to stop any corporate body from altering the nature of that open space and re-zoning it as residential or even industrial without any consultation.
We do not want spaces planned for us. We prefer our countryside to be left to grow naturally. The BDC plan was scheduled to take over 35 years and the current plans must take into account the next 35 years.
I have referred to one acre of land being taken over for residential use. That must beg the question, what price the other 468 acres? The open space in the corporation's plan will probably attract wildlife seeking protection from the roars of heavy machinery. It will be at the whim of council planning and unthinking councillors—there are many of them on the Labour side. Wildlife movement will be endangered. Wildlife environment and habitat will be destroyed on building sites as well as in surrounding areas.
There is a pleasant wooded skyline over Dunton ridge. The corporation has filled in some gaps in the skyline at a basic level, but there is no guarantee that the new or old screen will continue to exist. From the outline plan it seems that the whole screen will be destroyed and only some houses will have a view over the countryside. Most of the trees are fine and mature and have taken more than 30 years to grow. Some of the best occupy the primary school site. the implications are obvious. There is no guarantee that the genuine, natural wood will continue to exist. The great concern among many residents in the area is that this development in the south-west part of Basildon will be allowed to continue. As the matter stands, the threat is hanging over us all that more building will take place, and that our countryside in Basildon will eventually be completely lost.
I urge the Minister to give some reassurance in this respect, and to give some legal force to the protection of our open spaces in the form of a clear statement about the Green Belt in Basildon. However, perhaps the most worrying aspect of the development is to ensure that any 996 further building should be used to accommodate the second and third generations of Basildonians. When youngsters in the town grow up, where will they settle, remembering the present rate of population expansion in the town? I believe that our residents should have priority in housing needs. We do not want young people to be forced to leave the town. The answer might be to hold another public inquiry, but I appreciate that this would involve further delay and expense.
I end with the declaration that, as long as I serve as the Member of Parliament for Basildon, I intend to strive for all my constituents to live in decent properties, to be given the opportunity to own their own homes, to enjoy the level of income to make that possible, and for their children to be able to enjoy our beautiful countryside. Anyone who tries to thwart me in that objective will find me a most formidable obstacle.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Sir George Young)My hon. Friend the Member for Basildon (Mr. Amess) has done his constituents a considerable service in the clear and forceful way in which he has brought out the problems affecting the south western part of Basildon new town, and his constituents are fortunate to have such a powerful advocate.
Since the Secretary of State has still to consider the local authority's comments on the proposals of Basildon development corporation, I cannot tonight answer all the points he has raised. However, I shall do my best to comment constructively on the more general issues. I can also assure my hon. Friend that we will take carefully into account all the points of detail that he has raised in relation to the current proposal.
To begin with, I should like to take the House back to the situation in Basildon that led to its designation as a new town. The main function of Basildon new town was, of course, like all the other new towns around London, to provide housing and jobs, and thus to relieve the housing problems in the aftermath of the second world war. However, at Basildon there was an additional reason, springing from the unusual history of the area. As far back as 1901, land at Basildon had been divided into small plots and sold at "champagne sales". The commercial company which had bought up land in the area issued free rail tickets from East Ham, and gave travellers a free lunch with champagne. Afterwards, when the potential purchasers judgment was impaired by this hospitality, they were sold small plots of land. After the first world war, the process continued. The land had never been of first-class agricultural quality, and farmers sold up their holdings piecemeal in competition with the small estate companies. Some of these deserved high prizes for their imagination in describing the land, if not for their honesty.
Unfortunately, none of the land speculators concerned themselves with the development resulting from their sales. Field after field was sub-divided on paper, but no roads or sewers were constructed. Outside each man's fence remained the heavy Essex clay, which was churned into an impassable quagmire in winter. Development was sporadic. Many of the plots were not built upon, so that it was uneconomic to provide roads and sewers. Much of the building was of a very poor standard.
When the idea of a new town was first mooted, the local authorities responsible for the planning of this part of 997 Essex saw in the new towns machinery a way in which progress could be made towards solving the problems of their area, as well as helping with the more general national problem.
I refer to this history of a generation ago because it is essential background to understanding much of the development of Basildon.
From the first, the south-west area of the present new town designated area has been part of the new town. The boundary was drawn in its present place in 1948 when the draft designation order was published, and since 1949, when the designation of the new town was confirmed, the south western boundary has been unchanged. Ever since that date, everyone concerned, whether already in the area or coming in afresh, has been on notice that there would probably be major changes carried out in the south-west area.
The boundary was drawn where it was to include the plotlands of Dunton, running eastwards from the Lower Dunton road towards the Langdon hills high road. From the start it was intended to buy up all the plotlands in order to ensure that the legacy of plotland development was sorted out.
In 1951 the corporation embarked upon the long process—nobody perhaps foresaw quite how long—of buying up some 30,000 plots, many in unknown ownership, to ensure that they were brought into a satisfactory pattern of overall development.
I want to deal with the way in which the present proposals have been arrived at. To begin with, the target for Basildon was the construction of a town with a population of 80,000 — and increase of 55,000 over those then resident in the area. Basildon was to be the biggest of the first generation of English new towns. I endorse what my hon. Friend said about the qualities of the corporation and its staff.
The first master plan in 1951 envisaged no new housing west of the Langdon hills. Although it was intended to buy up all the plotlands, in those early days the intention was to return to agriculture such parts of them as were not required for redevelopment.
By the mid-sixties the target population for Basildon had been raised from 80,000 to 140,000. A new master plan was drawn up to accommodate this much larger population. This envisaged a population of 30,000 in the south western area, which would have meant building on virtually all the land to the east of Langdon hills high road as well as Langdon hill, Great Berry and Dunton hills. Not surprisingly such intensive development provoked opposition. In the light of a public inquiry, the Minister in effect reduced the target population for the south west to about 23,000.
Two more plans for the south western area were produced in 1970 and 1973.in which the corporation attempted to find the optimum distribution of housing and open space for this population figure. Neither of those achieved general acceptance, and they were withdrawn.
Finally, in 1974 the corporation put forward yet another plan which was examined at a public inquiry in 1976. I understand my hon. Friend's confusion at the number of plans that were put forward. The then Secretary of State, the right hon. Member for Bethnal Green and Stepney (Mr. Shore), accepted the findings of the inspector and modified this plan by deleting a proposed housing area in the Willow Park area, south east of the present Marks hill nature reserve.
998 The right hon. Gentleman accepted in principle the idea of housing in the Dunton hills and Great Berry areas, but he instructed the corporation to set back the housing from the line of the escarpment so that it would not intrude into views from outside the designated area. The corporation also undertook to carry out advance tree planting to screen the housing areas. It has since planted some 25,000 trees for that purpose. Now that the corporation has come to working out its present detailed proposals for the Dunton hills and the south-west area open space, it has published public notices of its application and has held a public meeting to explain the proposals further.
I hope that this incursion into local history will go some way towards reassuring my hon. Friend that the corporation has been far from hasty and inconsiderate.
Having thus sketched out the background, it may help if I remind my hon. Friend of the broad outlines of the planning process in new towns. I have spoken of the master plans which have been produced for Basildon. Those master plans do not have any statutory force, but they form the framework against which the corporation carries out its duty of bringing forward to the Secretary' of State, from time to time, formal proposals for the development of various parts of its area. The Secretary of State must then consult the local planning authorities. If in the light of their comments he then approves such proposals, the corporation then has planning permission to carry them out, or it may authorise other people to whom it has disposed of land to carry out the approved development. If the Secretary of State wants to modify the proposals before he approves them, he can of course do so.
To back up these provisions, the developrnent corporations have powers of compulsory purchase. Without those, the task of securing development of their towns in a systematic and expeditious manner would be virtually unattainable. Those compulsory purchase powers are to some extent reserve powers which are not often used, but there are inevitably a number of cases where they must be used to enable the corporation to assemble land for redevelopment. Often these powers must be used because of defects in the title or because land is in unknown ownership. In the case of Basildon, with its peculiar history of land sales, they are often needed for this purpose.
I turn now to the proposals that are currently before the Secretary of State. The proposals for development are of two very different kinds. One set of proposals defines the precise boundary and describes the general nature of the proposed Dunton hills housing area. The second set of proposals in effect declares the Development Corporation's wish that a large tract of land—some 470 acres — in the south-west area should remain un-developed and should be put to various forms of non-intensive use for recreation or amenity purposes.
In addition, the corporation envisages retention as open space of a further 400 acres in the south-west area which are now in agricultural use or which are covered by existing planning permissions as riding centres or nature reserves.
In other words, the corporation's current proposals imply that rather more than half the 1,600 acres in the south-west area would remain open space of some kind or other. I hope that my hon. Friend derives some comfort from that.
999 I would like to clear up some apparent misconceptions about the nature and timing of the housing development which has been approved at Great Berry and which is proposed at Dunton hills.
First, and very important, the development of these areas will be predominantly by the private sector for sale. The corporation will assemble the land and set in hand construction of the basic infrastructure needed to open it up for development. But we do not see the development corporation undertaking any more general-purpose building for rent. This has a number of consequences, which I hope will meet some of the specific points raised by my hon. Friend.
The timing of development will depend in the first instance on the market for houses, not on any externally imposed programme. I am aware of the concern of the local authorities that the early development of the remaining new town housing land will aggravate the potential problem of finding land for the housing needs of the next decade while at the same time avoiding encroachment on to land which they would like to see as green belt. I accept that it is not easy to reconcile these conflicting pressures. I can only repeat a message that will be familiar to my hon. Friend, that the council should make progress with a local plan for the district that would address the longer-term requirements for housing land to the end of the century and beyond. Such a plan would also serve to define the extent of the green belt around the town.
My hon. Friend has mentioned his concern about the level of unemployment in Basildon and expressed fears that early development of housing in the south-west area will add to the problem. Since the housing will be for sale, I do not think that this is a real danger. On the contrary, the availability of attractive new houses for owner-occupation in areas such as the south-west will, I hope, help to bring new employers and new jobs to Basildon.
My hon. Friend mentioned the difficult ground conditions which might be encountered in the south-west area. The answer here is simply that it will be the private developers' responsibility to employ the best means available to them for building sound, competitively priced, houses. The corporation demands the provision of an NHBC guarantee, and building society requirements make such a guarantee almost inevitable. I am told that ground conditions at Dunton are not markedly different from those in other parts of the new town where private building has been highly successful.
I understand my hon. Friend's concern that as far as possible new houses should go to the second or third generation households formed by local people. Once we move away from rented housing, however, it is not 1000 possible to allocate housing to particular groups of people. On the other hand, steps can be taken to ensure that a reasonable proportion of new houses are within the means of local first-time buyers. I am keen that the corporation should do its best to encourage local people to buy the new houses through schemes whereby they can give a discount on the land element of the purchase price of such houses and a preferential chance to buy.
My hon. Friend has queried the need for the corporation to acquire some of the parcels of land in this area. The present position is that two compulsory purchase orders in respect of the Dunton hills housing area have been submitted to the Secretary of State for confirmation. The statutory objection periods have ended and we are now considering a small number of objections. The Department has yet to receive compulsory purchase orders in respect of the south west open space. My hon. Friend will realise that in these circumstances I cannot comment on the details of individual cases. He has, however, suggested that my Department is being unreasonable in pressing the development corporation to rush ahead with compulsory purchase orders.
My hon. Friend will know that we have set a target for winding up the corporation. If that target is to be achieved, the development corporation's work of land assembly must be completed before then. As I have explained, this land assembly work has been a special task of the Basildon Development Corporation, since it was set up in 1949. To abandon the task now would be to waste a large amount of the money and effort which has gone into this process in the past. The statutory timetables allow reasonable periods to put forward objections and the compulsory purchase orders cannot be coming as a surprise to anyone.
At this point I want to comment on what my hon. Friend said about local concern for the longer-term protection of the open space in the south-west area, after the corporation has been wound up. I hope that he will understand that I cannot today offer any assurances. In the first place, we are not yet ready to announce our decision on the corporation's proposals. Furthermore the protection of the land from development in the longer term will depend both on future ownership and on decisions yet to be taken about the definition of the green belt within the local plan.
My hon. Friend has done his constituents a considerable service in raising all these questions. As I have said, we have still to complete some of the statutory processes and I am not, therefore, able tonight to give him firm answers on everything. I shall carefully consider, along with all the other representations, the points that he has made, and be in contact with him.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Adjourned accordingly at ten minutes past Twelve o' clock.