Nuclear Waste (Compensation) (Hansard, 24 July 1986)

§ Mr. Douglas Hogg (Grantham)

I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 10, for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration, namely, The refusal of NIREX to compensate property owners in Fulbeck who cannot sell their properties because of plans to dispose of nuclear waste at Fulbeck. As you will appreciate, Mr. Speaker, and as the House will know, I and residents in and around Fulbeck strongly oppose the proposal to put low-level nuclear waste into what is euphemistically called a near-surface disposal facility.

At the moment, I wish to concentrate on an important, albeit fairly narrow, matter — property compensation. This falls into two parts. The first part is being dealt with and is in connection with local residents who were selling property at the time of the announcement and whose contracts fell through. I am happy to say that I and others were able to persuade NIREX to pick up those contracts. A much more serious problem is now arising, which is that, because of the announcement by NIREX to treat Fulbeck as a possible waste disposal site, many local property owners are unable to sell their properties, either at all or at full valuation. I and others have been pressing NIREX to enter into some agreement either to purchase the properties or to make compensation. It has refused to do that and that is unacceptable and should be unacceptable to the House.

There is a precedent which I am entitled to call in aid because in Kent the Channel Tunnel company has now 640 given an undertaking that if, during the next 10 years, property owners are unable to sell their properties at full valuation, the company will buy in the properties. Unfortunately, I have been unable to persuade NIREX to take a similar view. That is an injustice to my constituents and requires the urgent attention of this House.