§ 2.35 p.m.
§ THE EARL OF LAUDERDALEMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will invite the Regional Economic Planning Councils, whether separately or in some cases jointly, to convene a symposium on regional natural resources and their potential development to assist the economy, on the lines of the Elgood symposium convened by the Scottish Council (Development and Industry).]
§ LORD BESWICKNo, my Lords. The Regional Economic Planning Councils in England are free to adopt any particular methods, such as symposia, in order to enlarge their knowledge of natural resources in their regions, without invitation from the Government. The Government are fully aware of the part which the increased utilisation of our natural resources could play in improving our balance-of-payments position. So far as research into natural resources is concerned the Natural Environment Research Council, which the Government set up under the Science and Technology Act, 1965, is responsible for co-ordinating this work.
§ THE EARL OF LAUDERDALEMy Lords, while thanking the noble Lord for that reply, may I ask him, first of all, whether he would not agree that the Elgood symposium was of great value and that some of its suggestions have been taken note of subsequently and acted on by the N.E.R.C. and other organisations to which the noble Lord 1022 referred? Would he not agree that regional research into natural resources must be a critical component in the working out of regional or provincial economic strategy, foreseen in the Redcliffe-Maud Report whose recommendations the Government are now committed to implementing?
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, I agree with the noble Earl that the Elgood Committee did a very useful job when it was set up in 1959, but since that date the recommendations which it put forward and which were acted upon have in a similar way been already acted upon in England and Wales. If the noble Earl is fully conversant with the work which is being done by the Institute of Geological Sciences and the Mineral Resources Consultative Committee, he will see that we are by no means behind Scotland in this work.
§ THE EARL OF LAUDERDALEMy Lords, while appreciating the noble Lord's answer, may I ask him not to take it amiss if I remind him that I have not received the list he promised a week ago of the various organisations engaged on this operation? Will he further consider this point: that central examination of such things as natural resources may be of too specialised a sort to suit the problem in hand, in so far as the central organisations to which he has referred are narrow specialist bodies and that what one needs is something certainly with multi- if not maxi-disciplinary activities rather than the reverse?
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, the noble Earl set forward his ideas in some detail in a debate we had some time ago, and I can assure him that they were given very careful thought. I say to him again, as I said last week, that while I appreciate his interest in this matter and while I am sure we cannot stimulate too much interest in the development of our natural resources, I believe he will find, if he looks at it again, that the means and methods he is suggesting are not the best in the circumstances.
§ LORD ILFORDMy Lords, does the noble Lord consider that these somewhat informal bodies are the right persons to undertake work of this nature?
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, if the noble Lord is referring to the Regional Councils when he talks of informal bodies, I agree with him.
§ LORD BYERSMy Lords, as a supporter of regional development, may I ask the noble Lord whether he is aware that the regional approach to geology is probably just the wrong way to tackle it?
§ LORD BESWICKMy Lords, that is quite right: some things, apart from the geological sciences, hydrology, oceanography, nature conservancy, work with research vessels and similar work, cannot be done on a regional basis.