ENVIRONMENT (Hansard, 7 March 1984)

HC Deb 07 March 1984 vol 55 cc833-52 833

§ 1. Mr. Bruce
asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what action he proposes to take on the recent recommendations of the Royal Commission on environmental pollution.

§ The Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Patrick Jenkin)
This is an admirable report which I shall be studying with great care in the coming weeks. The Government will respond before the end of the Session.

§ Mr. Bruce
I am grateful to the Secretary of State, and, in the light of his comment that this is an admirable report, I hope that many of its recommendations will be accepted. May I press the right hon. Gentleman to give serious consideration to an early acceptance of the recommendations in respect of acid rain? It appears that we are being affected by such depositions in Britain and that it is necessary to increase research and to introduce pilot schemes with a view to reducing the emission of sulphur. I urge the right hon. Gentleman to give positive consideration to accepting these recommendations as early as possible.

§ Mr. Jenkin
We have had the report for only a couple of weeks. The hon. Gentleman will have noted that recently we have increased by £1 million the sum allocated to research into these matters. I am sure the House will have noticed that, in the longer term, the Royal Commission recognises that one way in which we shall be able to achieve a reduction of the emission of sulphur dioxide is by what it describes as a modest increase in nuclear power generation". That is something which the Government would welcome.

§ Mr. Forman
Is my right hon. Friend aware that his positive general response to the problem, as highlighted in 834 the report, is most welcome and that he will have the full support of a growing number of people, whether Conservative, Liberal, Labour or of any other political affiliation, who attach the highest importance to the preservation of the environment?

§ Mr. Jenkin
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for what he has said. The problems of pollution and the protection of the environment are issues that are embraced by all parties and by a wide swathe of public opinion. The Government are anxious to be in the lead and to ensure that we play our full part, both nationally and internationally, in the improvement of this area of policy.

§ Mr. Allan Roberts
Is the Secretary of State aware that there are many who will not share his view that the alternative to acid rain pollution is the uncertainty of nuclear pollution? Are there not other ways of dealing with acid rain, such as spending some money on fossil fuel power stations to prevent it, and investing money, as the report recommends, in alternative energy sources other than nuclear power?

§ Mr. Jenkin
The hon. Gentleman referred to my opinion, but it was the Royal Commission which referred to a modest increase in nuclear power generation". That is a matter which the House will have to take on board. I shall want to discuss the recommendations with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Energy, including the available abatement options for sulphur dioxide. I shall want to have discussions also with the Central Electricity Generating Board. The importance of the research to which I have referred is that it is necessary to establish a clear chain of cause and effect before spending what could be hundreds of millions of pounds, which might in the event turn out to be useless.

§ Mr. John Browne
Although I fully support the exploitation of oil and gas reserves, does my right hon. Friend agree that onshore, as opposed to offshore, exploitation is new to Britain? Does he accept that it is a complex business, with a serious impact on the environment in terms of noise, sight, vehicles, and so on? Will my right hon. Friend please tell us whether the Royal Commission's report and the information contained in "Alternative Energy Sources" cover the protection of the environment in this particular respect?

§ Mr. Jenkin
I understand my hon. Friend's concern. I should have thought that it would be reasonable to consider that an environmental impact assessment would be the appropriate procedure to accompany such a major development proposal. This might be the type of procedure to come under the new European directive. Obviously, when the directive is promulgated, we shall need to take the fullest account of the points raised by my hon. Friend.

§ Dr. David Clark
Although we welcome the Government's positive response, we hope that it will soon turn into action. Is the Royal Commission correct in asserting in paragraph 4.100 that the Government are to use the North sea to take waste material? Will he confirm that this stance was reflected in the recent London dumping convention, when Britain was found to be in a completely isolated position? The Opposition completely dissociate themselves from the Government's intransigent and environmentally damaging attitude towards the North sea.

835

§ Mr. Jenkin
I totally deny what the hon. Gentleman said about the Government's attitude to the North sea. On the contrary, we intend to play a positive part [Interruption.] Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will allow me to finish my answer. We intend to play a positive part in the conference, which the Federal Republic of Germany is calling, on the pollution of the North sea. We have already undertaken work, for instance, to reduce the colliery spoil on the North sea shore, which is one of the matters to which the Royal Commission referred.
The London dumping convention is usually thought of in the context of dumping low-level atomic waste. There is no suggestion that any of that waste will be dumped in the North sea. The site earmarked for that purpose, and where some of the early dumping took place, was hundreds of miles out into the Atlantic. I am not sure what exact point the hon. Gentleman has in mind.

cc835-6