Stansted: Costs of Inquiry (Hansard, 21 May 1981)

§ The Earl of Cork and Orrery
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

§ Lord Bellwin
My Lords, in accordance with normal practice the Government will pay the costs of providing the inspector and his assessors. In addition, they have agreed in this exceptional case to pay the costs of accommodation.

§ The Earl of Cork and Orrery
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that Answer. Is he aware that the British Airports Authority have sent out a brief, of which I hold a copy in my hand, which includes the following words: The Secretary of State for the Environment has announced that his department will pay the costs of the forthcoming public inquiry into the BAA's plans for a new terminal at Stansted"? As this is an inaccurate statement of the position, will the Government be prepared to desire the authority to correct it in their next briefing note?

§ Lord Bellwin
My Lords, I am not sure why my noble friend, or the people who have the document to which he refers, feel that this is an inaccurate statement. So far as I am aware, this is a correct statement. I am not quite sure that I am following my noble friend's point.

§ Lord Renton
My Lords, does my noble friend recollect that the last major inquiry of this kind was that held by the Royal Commission into the third London 1013 airport, the so-called Roskill Commission, which lasted several years and involved local authorities and many private individuals in very large expenditure, expenditure which was for the public benefit as well as for the benefit of those represented? Bearing in mind that there is likely to be a repetition, on a slightly smaller scale but still a very large scale, of the kind of costs that were incurred on the previous occasion, I wonder whether the Government would consider, even in these times of necessary economy, at any rate helping with the costs of the local authorities, which might be considerable.

§ Lord Bellwin
My Lords, perhaps I did not make it clear enough in my original Answer, but I thought I said that in fact we will be meeting the costs of the local authorities in this case. It is the normal practice for the authority to pay but in this case the Uttlesford District Council, who are the planning authority, asked that the Government should pay because of the exceptional circumstances, and we felt that that was right. So in fact I am agreeing with my noble friend, that having regard to all the expense involved, and the fact that this is the third time round, we should meet these expenses, and that is why we are doing so.

§ Lord Mottistone
My Lords, would my noble friend not think that it was fair if some sort of assistance could be given to the private protesters of the local area in this particular case? They have collected money and fought three times, and really to go round the buoy again on what will be substantially the same sort of evidence seems to me to be most unfair. If any money is to be given to anybody, whether it be the local authority or the British Airports Authority, then surely it would be reasonable for private individuals, who represent the local community in a more direct sense, to get something as well?.

§ Lord Bellwin
My Lords, this inquiry is in fact a much more modest inquiry, not as far-reaching as were the previous ones. We do not feel that in these circumstances we should pay the costs, or part of the costs, of the objectors.

§ Baroness Trumpington
My Lords, I apologise to the Minister, but I am still not quite sure whether it is only the local council's expenses which will be paid or those of other councils, because I am perfectly certain that this matter will involve Cambridge in expense.

§ Lord Bellwin
My Lords, it is only the expenses of the Uttlesford District Council.

§ Lord Elwyn-Jones
My Lords, would it not be appropriate for payment to be made to a representation of local objectors? This is often done in inquiries. I hope the Minister's Answer does not exclude the power of those running the inquiry to exercise discretion and to indicate that at any rate there should be representational backing, and paid for through public funds. It has often happened in public inquiries.

§ Lord Bellwin
My Lords, we are talking here of a planning inquiry. While I defer, as always, to the 1014 noble and learned Lord on his knowledge and experience of these matters, which is so much greater than mine, nevertheless it is a planning inquiry, and I understand that it is not normal that that be done. I have no wish at all to anticipate what anyone might recommend. I am stating the position as it is at the present time, and as I think I would be bound to say it is likely to be.

§ The Earl of Cork and Orrery
My Lords, has my noble friend understood? I think perhaps I did not make it clear. What I was referring to in the British Airport Authority's note was the statement that the department has agreed to, pay the costs of the forthcoming public inquiry". The costs must amount to tens of thousands of pounds; they are far beyond compensation. Is it his opinion that this statement that they have issued goes much too far and should be corrected?

§ Lord Bellwin
Well, my Lords, whether or not this is too much or too little, or whether it covers all that some would like or not, I suppose would at the end of the day have to be a matter of opinion and judgment. So far as I am aware, what we are proposing to pay is exactly what I said; we will pay the cost of providing the inspector and his assessors, and, in addition, the costs of accommodation.