HC Deb 28 June 1989 vol 155 cc956-8
2. Mr. Brandon-Bravo

To ask the Secretary of State for the Environment what proportion of pollution in the North sea comes from the Rhine.

The Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Nicholas Ridley)

According to the North sea quality status report of November 1987, about 50 per cent. of contaminant inputs from rivers to the North sea are accounted for by the Rhine and the Meuse together.

Mr. Brandon-Bravo

The public will be surprised and shocked by what my right hon. Friend has told the House. They will be surprised because Britain is supposed to be the dirty man of Europe, and they will be shocked to learn of the damage done to the environment by German rivers. They are entitled to be angry at the lecturing we get from Europe. On a more positive note, will my right hon. Friend look to the future? Does he agree that it is not just a question of money and how deep our purse is, but of the long period that will be necessary to do what we can on this side of the Channel to improve the environment and our rivers?

Mr. Ridley

My hon. Friend is right and I will gibe him further details. Of the nitrogen entering the North sea, the eastern North sea receives 768,000 tonnes from the continent as opposed to 75,000 tonnes from Britain. The continental contries discharge 14.6 tonnes of mercury into the North sea, as opposed to 1.9 tonnes from Britain. On cadmium, the figures are 31.6 tonnes against 5.8 tonnes. For industrial waste, the figures are 1.2 million tonnes as opposed to 0.2 million tonnes from Britain. For incineration, the figure for Britain is 2 per cent. and for continental countries it is 55 per cent. It is questionable who is the dirty man of the North sea.

Mr. Malcolm Bruce

Does the Secretary of State accept that it is invidious to come to the House and pass blame on to the continental countries for the pollution that we are causing? Will he acknowledge that the Irish sea is the most radioactive sea in the world as a result of pollution from this country—

Mr. Speaker

Order. This question relates to the Rhine.

Mr. Ridley

I never know why Opposition Members want to knock this country and its excellent record. The Irish sea is not the most radioactive sea by any means. It is 80 times more dangerous to live in Cornwall than in the constituency of Copeland because of natural radiation from radon.

Mr. Devlin

It would be of great interest to the House and to people in the north-east if my right hon. Friend would give us some idea of how much industrial waste is put into the North sea by Britain and West Germany respectively. How much waste is incinerated at sea? As my right hon. Friend will know, the ash and other contaminants that are not incinerated fall into the sea, thus polluting it.

Mr. Ridley

I shall give my hon. Friend the figures on industrial waste. Germany puts in 1.2 million tonnes per annum, which is 60 per cent. of the total. The United Kingdom puts in 0.2 million tonnes, which is 10 per cent. For incineration, the figure for Germany is 58,000 tonnes, whereas for Britain the figure is 2,000 tonnes per annum. I want merely to establish the facts in this matter.

Mrs. Ann Taylor

Does the Secretary of State accept that his criticisms of other countries would carry more force if we put our own house in order? What is the cost to the United Kingdom of stopping the pollution of the North sea by sewage sludge, which is expected to be banned by next year's North sea conference, and the cost of stopping the dumping of raw sewage from coastal outflows into the North sea? Should not the Government disclose the costs of those developments, especially as the European Commission is preparing the directive on sewage, or will the Secretary of State suggest that this is another directive on pollution prevention that will be flouted by the Government?

Mr. Ridley

I do not know why the hon. Lady continues to knock the United Kingdom in the face of the figures that I have just given—[Interruption.]I am not knocking anybody; I am merely giving her the figures, which she does not seem to like very much. I dispute the hon. Lady's view on sewage sludge. Putting sewage sludge into the sea may be the best way to deal with it. No doubt the hon. Lady has seen the recently published report on dioxins, of which one of the main sources is the incineration of sewage sludge. Incineration may be the worst environmental option. The hon. Lady should get her science right; she is ill-founded in science. Furthermore, the hon. Lady does not seem to realise that the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution has recommended that long sea outfalls are the best way of dealing with sewage from coastal towns.