HL Deb 24 November 1970 vol 313 cc2-4
LORD KENNET

My 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 intend, as the last Government did, to introduce a new type of general conservation scheme for historic towns and cities, which would attract Exchequer grant at a rate of 50 per cent.]

THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY OF STATE, DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (LORD SANDFORD)

My Lords, discussions with the local authorities in the four cities of Chester, York, Bath and Chichester about pilot conservation projects are proceeding. Her Majesty's Government consider that until these particular studies have been carried further, decisions on a new grant specifically for general conservation schemes would be premature.

LORD KENNET

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that that amounts to the tearing up of four years of work on the four towns studies by the four consultants and by the Preservation Policy Group, all of which came to the conclusion that such schemes could not be done without an Exchequer grant?

LORD SANDFORD

No, my Lords; I would not accept that. The four studies have been commissioned; several projects in connection with conservation are going on in pursuance of those studies and the work is proceeding quite satisfactorily at the moment. Furthermore, there was the Preservation Policy Group which the, noble Lord himself chaired and whose Report has yet to be published although it has been studied already in the Department. Several of the proposals are under active consideration and are being studied. When I say that this decision is premature, it does not mean to say that it may not be accepted in due course.

LORD KENNET

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the Preservation Policy Group Report was accepted by the last Government and that if anything is being studied about it now it is not its proposals but the question of whether or not the acceptance of those proposals by the last Government should be torn up?

LORD SANDFORD

My Lords, as I recall it, there are eleven separate proposals in that Report. They are all being studied and none is being torn up.

LORD REAY

My Lords, would Her Majesty's Government not agree that since at the moment the Government supply up to half the deficiency cost of redevelopment schemes in central areas, to do the same with conservation schemes would be moving in the direction of integrating a policy towards redevelopment schemes and conservation schemes and would also redress the present policy of a bias against cultural traditions?

LORD SANDFORD

No, My Lords, I do not agree that there is a bias against our cultural heritage or traditions in this matter. There is a whole range of different grants that can be brought to bear on conservation projects. Some of them, in the case of derelict land in development areas, are as high as 85 per cent. and many others are as high as 75 per cent. All can be brought to bear in various ways on conservation projects.

LORD KENNET

My Lords, will the noble Lord enable me to get this point quite clear? Does he agree that the Preservation Policy Group Report said that there should be a 50 per cent. Exchequer grant for general conservation schemes, that the last Government accepted this proposal and said that they would build up public expenditure in this way to £3 million a year over three years, and that the first Answer he gave is to the effect that this will no longer be done?

LORD SANDFORD

My Lords, the noble Lord has another Question for me later on this week when perhaps we could go further into this matter. When the Report of the Preservation Policy Group has been published (and at the present moment knowledge of its details is available to only a limited number of people) perhaps he will put down a Question and then we can debate that, too. But I do not admit that all the work of the Group has been in any sense torn up.