HL Deb 21 March 1973 vol 340 cc722-4

2.33 p.m.

LORD HEWLETT

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether, in view of the deep concern felt in the House that the National Parks should be preserved from the intrusion of motorways and, or major road development schemes, they will consider strengthening the legislation so as to make National Parks inviolate.

LORD SANDFORD

My Lords, the British National Parks are extensive. They included a total of 16 major trunk roads when they were originally designated. All these roads need improving from time to time, particularly to make them fit better into the landscape and to draw heavy traffic out of narrow streets in towns, and out of sensitive areas of the countryside. A quarter of a million people live in our National Parks, and many thousands more want to get into them and enjoy them. All expect modern facilities. I agree with my noble friend that every development in a National Park needs the most careful consideration by all concerned.

LORD SHACKLETON

My Lords, (nay I put this question to the Deputy Chief Whip? On occasions noble Lords opposite have to try to control the number of supplementary questions. We are exceedingly grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Sandford, for giving such a lengthy reply. It really amounted to a Statement. Whereas I would not wish to be other than thankful to him for this, we have run into this trouble before, that if we get very lengthy Answers it is almost inevitable that we shall have a very long period on Questions.

LORD DENHAM

My Lords, I will take note of what the noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition has said and will pass it on to my noble friend. But, in fact, looking at the clock I see that not a very long period has passed by already. Only three minutes seem to have elapsed.

LORD SLATER

My Lords, on the Question, is the Minister satisfied that adequate inspection is taking place? Is he aware that one is of the opinion that satisfactory inspection is not taking place even to-day, and that more inspection should take place in order that proper accommodation is given to the general public in the National Parks?

LORD SANDFORD

My Lords, I am not quite sure what kind of inspection by what kind of inspector the noble Lord has in mind.

LORD SLATER

My Lords, I am thinking of the inlets to the National Parks and pedestrians and people travelling by motor-car having a better opportunity to converge on the National Parks than they have at the moment. Some of the roads leading to the National Parks are in a shocking condition and ought to be improved so that better accommodation may be provided for the general public. After all, they are termed "National Parks" but they do not fit in with what is required of National Parks so far as the general public is concerned.

LORD SANDFORD

My Lords, I agree with the noble Lord, but I think I covered it in my opening Statement—opening Question—opening Answer—

SEVERAL NOBLE LORDS

Hear, hear!

LORD SANDFORD

—where I made clear that one of the reasons for the improvements which go on from time to time on the roads is specifically to produce better access for the people who want to visit the Parks.

LORD HEWLETT

My Lords, may I thank the Minister, and may I ask him, in relation to his "Question", "Statement" or "Answer", whether he can give an assurance to this House that on no future occasion will a major change be proposed in National Parks without the Minister's going and inspecting for himself and not just relying on the reports of others?

LORD SANDFORD

Yes, my Lords, I think I can certainly give that assurance. If there is any major change, Ministers will want to see things for themselves. But the procedure on which we rely is a public local inquiry conducted under an impartial inspector, at which everybody concerned has an opportunity to make his views known, and we must not do anything to short-circuit that.

LORD HEWLETT

My Lords, am I right in thinking that the Minister could reasonably be expected to go and see for himself before deciding on the report made to him by the inspector?

LORD SANDFORD

My Lords, I was not denying that, but I was pointing out to my noble friend, and to the House, that there are Statutory procedures, and nothing that a Minister does or does not do alters the necessity to adhere to them.

THE EARL OF ONSLOW

My Lords, as the noble Lord does not deny that the Minister might have to go to see a site on future proposals regarding National Parks, why cannot he do it this time?

LORD SANDFORD

My Lords, I have already made clear to the House that on this particular occasion, not one but three Ministers inspected the site.

LORD FERRIER

My Lords, with reference to my noble friend's "Question" or "Statement", can he tell the House whether this declaration of policy, more or less, also includes the policy of the Secretary of State for Scotland?

LORD SANDFORD

My Lords, there is nothing new in the policy I have been outlining and it applies throughout the Kingdom.

Forward to