HL Deb 09 July 1982 vol 432 cc995-6

11.7 a.m.

Lord Gainford

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

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majestys' Government what steps are being taken to preserve the site of the Battle of Naseby (1645), now threatened by a proposed motorway.

The Earl of Avon

My Lords, the new road proposal which affects the Naseby area is the M.1—A.1 link road which will be an all-purpose trunk road and not a motorway. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Transport is looking at possible routes both north of Naseby, where the battlefield is, and to the south. He is anxious to avoid encroaching on the main area of the battlefield and I can assure your Lordships that his proposal, which he hopes to publish later this year, will take full account of the claims of the battlefield, the effect on the countryside, the interests of local residents and the cost of the proposal as well as all other relevant factors. A public inquiry will almost certainly be needed before a final decision is taken and this will allow the published route, whether north or south of Naseby, to be debated alongside any alternative routes put forward by objectors or interested groups.

Lord Gainford

My Lords, I thank my noble friend the Minister for that very full, interesting and encouraging Answer. May I ask him whether he will recommend the southern route for the trunk road which would run between Naseby and Hazlebeech, and thus preserve the land which is a memorial to a milestone of progress towards constitutional monarchy and the British parliamentary system we know today?

The Earl of Avon

My Lords, I note what my noble friend says, although of course I cannot commit myself. If it did go north I am sure the House would like to know that the area where it might pass would be the Roundheads' baggage train.

Lord Davies of Leek

My Lords, I think that the noble Earl has won that one. Is the noble Earl aware, nevertheless, that if we could get, without party bitterness, an intelligent co-ordination of road and rail, many of our meadows and sacred memorial spots from our history may be left alone, and that transport and life on road and rail would be easier?

The Earl of Avon

My Lords, of course I note what the noble Lord says. This is a major link which is being proposed known, I think, as a green circle, and it will be an important addition to the Midlands.

Lord Sandford

My Lords, would my noble friend not agree that there was a consultation exercise into the alternative routes that this road might take as far back as 1975 or 1976? Was it not the case that, as a result of that time-consuming, expensive and elaborate exercise, the southern corridor passing south of Naseby was selected?

The Earl of Avon

Yes, indeed, my Lords, that is true. But as a result of going ahead with that plan—the review was in 1975—further studies revealed the poor ground conditions along the route, and this factor forced us to bring the route nearer Naseby village. It is for this reason, which is a good one, that we feel the residents ought to be consulted again, despite the extra costs.

Lord Sandford

My Lords, may I ask my noble friend a further question arising from that reply? What is the point of having consultation exercises on alternative routes if something as basic as a soil survey is not first of all carried out thoroughly? Secondly, having now established why it is necessary to reopen this matter, would my noble friend prefer to give the House some details of the soil survey now, or would he prefer to respond to a parliamentary Question for Written Answer?

The Earl of Avon

My Lords, I do not think that I should like to take up the time of the House with a soil survey, but I should be happy to respond in a Written Answer.