HL Deb 09 February 1987 vol 484 cc487-94

7.15 p.m.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment (Lord Skelmersdale) rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 15th December be approved. [7th Report from the Joint Committee.]

The noble Lord said: My Lords, this order is made under provisions in the Local Government Planning and Land Act 1980. Section 134 of the Act enables the Secretary of State to designate an urban development area and Section 135 empowers him to establish a corporation for the purposes of regenerating that area. It designates land in and around Trafford Park as an urban development area and will set up the Trafford Park Development Corporation to tackle the regeneration of the area. Although the order was judged to be hybrid, I am glad that no petitions against it were received and it was approved in another place by the House generally, including those of different political persuasions with knowledge of the area.

Almost exactly a week ago, I was standing here telling your Lordships about our inner city policy in fairly abstract terms. Today, I am in the happy position of participating in a practical demonstration of that policy and the Government's commitment to it. If the House is content, the Trafford Park Development Corporation will come into formal existence tomorrow—just four months and two days after the policy was first announced in this House.

Trafford Park itself is an industrial estate of around 2,000 acres close to the city centres of Manchester and Salford. Much of the land on the estate is empty or under-used, and many of the buildings and much of the infrastructure is obsolete. It now provides less than half the jobs it provided in the 1950s. But it is very well situated, close to the motorway network and close to major centres of population. A study of the area was commissioned at the end of 1985, jointly sponsored by Government, the local authority and the major manufacturers on the park. The report recommended the creation of an urban development corporation. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Environment responded quickly. He announced his intentions of creating such a corporation and reviewing the potential of surrounding areas. My honourable friend the Minister for Housing, Urban Affairs and Construction met councillors representing all parties in the area to discuss the proposed boundaries. The effectiveness and appropriateness of the resulting proposals enshrined in this order are, I think, demonstrated by the lack of petitions and the general welcome the order has received.

Very briefly, I should now like to run through a series of points relating specifically to the Government's intention for this corporation. The area now proposed covers something over 3,000 acres, consisting of the park and three other areas of land: a strip of land in Salford on the north bank of the Manchester Ship canal, opposite the park; land at the eastern entrance to the park; and the site of the former steelworks near Irlam. The last of these is a separate piece of land, the inclusion of which has, I am pleased to say, met with considerable support; not least from the local representatives who pressed for its inclusion.

The 1980 Act gives a develpment corporation various powers, including powers to acquire, manage and dispose of land and to support local and community groups. The Secretary of State may confer various other functions on a corporation by statutory instrument. My right honourable friend intends with this corporation to follow the pattern of the two existing urban development corporations and give the corporation development control functions. He will make orders to that effect and he may in due course vest certain public sector land in the corporation. He does not at this stage see a need to give the corporation housing, building control or public health functions.

My right honourable friend announced some time ago that he intends to appoint Mr. Peter Hadfield, a local man, as chairman of the corporation. This announcement met with universal acclaim. It was described in the debate in another place as an "inspired" appointment. Mr. Hadfield, with characteristic vigour, has already conducted a series of meetings with local interests. The other board members will be chosen to include people with relevant local experience. In particular, there will be members from the local authorities directly affected. The staff of the corporation will be kept to a minumum. There is no intention of this corporation becoming either a large or a permanent bureaucracy. Once it has done its job it will go. And while it is around, it will buy in as much expertise as it can. I expect it to make use of local firms and, where appropriate, to consider using local authorities as agents.

Each of the new UDCs in England is expected to spend between £100 million and £160 million over six or seven years. The Government do not intend that this should be found from programmes currently committed to the surrounding areas. Indeed, urban programme allocations to some of the nearby local authorities in the coming year have, I am glad to say, been increased. I expect the work of the corporation to strengthen the regional economy, and to assist the development of other initiatives such as Phoenix. I was pleased to see that in the debate in another place Members for constituencies throughout the Manchester conurbation believed that the development corporation would benefit the area as a whole, not just Trafford and Salford.

The Government have been delighted with the reception given to the proposal to set up a Trafford Park Development Corporation. I believe this reception and the degree of co-operation already demonstrated between central government, the two local authorities concerned and the local private sector must give the corporation a flying start. I commend the order to the House.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 15th December be approved. [7th Report from the Joint Committee.]—(Lord Skelmersdale.)

Lord Dean of Beswick

My Lords, we on this side of the House accept the order but I should like the Minister to clear up one or two points. I was going to ask whether the local authority will be represented on the corporation. I think he has indicated that that will be so. I understand that the body will consist of a chairman and 11 members. The local authority is to be given places—and that is sensible—and, obviously, people from commerce and industry will be appointed. Would it not be proper to consider the appointment of a recognised local trade unionist, bearing in mind that this is still a heavily industrialised area and will continue to be so if the urban development corporation succeeds? Would it not be better to carry the trade unions with us and to let them know from the commencement what is going on?

I was interested to hear that the chairman had already been appointed. I do not know Mr. Hadfield. I know of him only as the chairman of the Greater Manchester Council residuary body. I do not know how much time a week the chairman of a residuary body is expected to put in, as against the chairman of an urban development corporation. Will it be the case that the person concerned will carry on indeterminately in those two jobs? I would find that hard to justify.

I worked in Trafford Park when the 50,000 people mentioned in the debate in another place worked there. I worked in the factory which employed 25,000 people, and so I am aware of what has happened in the area and what needs doing. Is it right that one person should be doing two jobs when his total attention needs to be given to renovating the Trafford Park area? It is one of the most important appointments that the Government will make, and I am a little worried about the dual responsibility.

In moving the order, the Minister said that his right honourable friend has additional powers which at this time he does not intend to invoke. I am a little concerned about the wide nature of the powers that could be invoked by the Secretary of State. The Minister said that his right honourable friend could also give the UDC greater powers as a building control authority, a housing authority or a public health authority but that the Government had no such proposals at present. In the interests of democracy I hope that they have no proposals at all because if one reaches that position one might as well completely dismantle local government in the area. The only responsibilities that could be left in the hands of local government if one went down that road would be education and the health service outside the public health authority. I should like some reassurance that that means what it says.

Finally, the most important step that the Government could take as an act of faith in the area is to bring forward the ordering of power stations, as I and other Members of your Lordships' House and Members in another place have been asking for months. This is the main lifeblood of the one large factory remaining in the area. Since I left that factory, the number of employees has fallen to fewer than 8,000. While the order is welcome, in the immediate future what would be more welcome is the Government's assent to the phased ordering of power stations which would benefit the area immeasurably. Having made those points, I should like to say that we accept the order.

Lord Tordoff

My Lords, from these Benches I should like to thank the Minister for bringing the order before us. We welcome it in principle. In the days when the Guardian was a proper newspaper and called itself the Manchester Guardian it once said in a leading article: There are those of us who have wondered at the continued existence of Liverpool since the building of the Manchester Ship Canal. Those were the great days of Trafford Park when it was a great inland port and when tremendous activity was taking place there in the heavy electrical engineering industry, the chemical industry and many other industries, and particularly in the docks. It has been desperately sad to see the way in which that once thriving part of Manchester has fallen into the condition that it is in today.

I also welcome the inclusion of the old Irlam steelworks area which I know quite well because it was on the other side of the ship canal from the place where I used to work myself. I know how large is the number of jobs that has been lost in the past few years at the factory where I used to work in the chemical industry, and I am quite sure that there is in the Irlam area a pool of labour and probably a high intensity of unemployment.

I shall not follow the noble Lord, Lord Dean of Beswick, on some of the points of detail but I agree that it is a good thing that the local authorities are to be brought into the corporation. Perhaps I may correct him by saying that there are 11 members plus a chairman and a deputy chairman—

Lord Dean of Beswick

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord.

Lord Tordoff

—so that there are 13 in all. It becomes a little like the Last Supper occasionally.

Baroness Seear

There are 12.

Lord Tordoff

My Lords, my noble friend the Leader of my party attempts to correct me, but I think there was one other in addition to the 12.

I should like to make a point in relation to transport within the new development corporation area. When your Lordships' Select Committee was looking at research and development into surface transport this year (a report which has yet to be published, though some of the evidence has been published so I do not think I am saying anything that is not on the record) I questioned the Secretary of State for Transport on whether Trafford Park would not make a useful demonstration area for some of the new forms of transport that are now available.

It was an opportunity for the Government to put some money into a demonstration project which would be useful not only in terms of assisting in new forms of transport and developing new markets in this country but also in helping to rejuvenate this badly rundown area. I wonder whether I may once again put that question forward. On that occasion I received a rather dusty answer. The Secretary of State for Transport may have had time to reconsider the question and perhaps the noble Lord, Lord Skelmersdale, will draw it to the attention of the appropriate authority.

7.30 p.m.

Lord Monkswell

My Lords, I must declare an interest in this debate in that currently I work in Trafford Park and have done for the past 14 years. I and my colleagues in the Labour movement have been appalled by what has happened to Trafford Park over the years. In my experience of working there for a number of years I have seen terrible developments. I have seen a reduction in the number of men and women employed in Trafford Park. In my own factory there has been a 50 per cent. reduction in the labour force over the past eight years.

The other factor which has appalled me almost as much as the loss of employment is the way that farmland—yes, my Lords, farmland—within the area designated by the order has been taken for industrial development. It may seem strange to your Lordships but within the boundaries of the order, as drawn on the map, there is a section of farmland. In fact, the map is not strictly accurate. A section of that farmland no longer exists because over the past few years it has been used for a warehouse development. Unfortunately, that did not provide many jobs, so I hope that the activities of the Urban Development Corporation will not result in that sort of development, though I suspect it will.

Yet again we see an erosion of local authority control. However, we must be thankful for the fact that money is to be ploughed into Trafford Park and the other area mentioned by the previous speaker—the old Irlam Steelworks. We are in a cleft stick. On the one hand, we are damned if we accept the Urban Development Corporation, in the sense that we lose the local authority control; and, on the other hand, if we reject what is on offer we lose the money. We are damned either way. Therefore, I hope that the future of Trafford Park will be a lot brighter than we can foresee at the moment. There will have to be a much more positive input from local authorities and from the workforce in the area into the development of Trafford Park than is envisaged under the setting up of this Urban Development Corporation.

I wish the Urban Development Corporation well but I feel that until those two elements of its activities are strengthened it will not be able to develop Trafford Park as it should be developed, not only for the people of Manchester, the people of the North-West, but the people of this country as a whole.

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, I am grateful to all three noble Lords who have taken part in this short discussion. The noble Lord, Lord Dean of Beswick, referred to an act of faith. The Government's first act of faith is of course in the area and in what can be done through the area and to the area through this organ for regeneration.

If I remember rightly, the noble Lord, Lord Tordoff, was actively involved with the first orders for the London Dockland Development Corporation. The noble Lord shakes his head—he was not. Nevertheless, he will know as well as I do, and as the House generally will know, how the situation has changed from those early ultra-suspicious days. However, the situation in Trafford Park, as the noble Lords, Lord Dean and Lord Monkswell, know far better than I, is totally different from either the Merseyside Development Corporation area or, indeed, from what were the conditions pertaining in Docklands, where there were five not very productive local authorities.

The order provides—the noble Lord, Lord Tordoff, was right except that he seemed to correct himself halfway through what he was saying—for a board of 13 in total. That is the answer to the noble Lord, Lord Dean. It is our intention to appoint a full complement in due course. In the shorter term a smaller number may be appointed to start the ball rolling. Initially, this board will be chaired by Mr. Peter Hadfield who, as the noble Lord, Lord Dean, pointed out fairly and correctly, is currently the chairman of the Greater Manchester Residuary Body. I can tell the House that he devotes on average two days a week to his post as chairman. That time commitment, due to his undoubted success in that position, will reduce over the next 18 months as the residuary body completes its task. In fact, that is rather faster than anyone could realistically have anticipated at the time of the abolition Bill. This is due principally to Mr. Hadfield's great efforts in this respect.

Mr. Hadfield will also devote two or three days a week to the job of chairman of the Trafford Park Development Corporation. Not only do I see no conflict of interests—which was not quite the noble Lord's point—but I think it is right and proper when one has an undoubtedly good and efficient man in a particular area, and who has been recognised as such, that the Government should make as full use of him as is possible. Of course, Mr. Hadfield has retired from his post as chairman and managing director of Bus North West.

I confirm that initially—assuming your Lordships' pass this order, which from comments by noble Lords I suspect is likely—his team will include three local authority members. I am not sure, although I will consider it for future members, that it would be right in this particular interest to have a specific trade union appointee on the board because I cannot see what relevance he would have to this sort of organisation; though as I said, I am perfectly prepared to consider the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Dean.

The subject of planning powers was mentioned. As I said, the Government intend to make Trafford Park Development Corporation the local planning authority for its area. My right honourable friend the Secretary of State intends to make an order conferring development control functions on the corporation in the near future. It is germane to the question put by the noble Lord, Lord Dean, that Section 148 of the 1980 Act provides a reserve power by which an urban development corporation may submit proposals to the Secretary of State. Such proposals, if approved, may receive planning permission. These are equivalent to the provisions available to new town development corporations. Therefore, they are well precedented.

As I said in my opening speech, there are other non-planning powers which my right honourable friend does not, on the whole, intend to vest in the development corporation without a vesting order. I think that the noble Lord had a particular point about health, did he not? The noble Lord also asked for reassurance on building control and housing powers. I repeat that at present we have no proposals to give the corporation these powers, though naturally we shall need to consider that in the light of circumstances at the time. However, I can assure the House that your Lordships will be fully informed.

Not surprisingly, the noble Lord, Lord Tordoff, made a suggestion about transport and suggested that this might be a useful demonstration area for new forms of transport. Indeed it may well be. I know that he has made that suggestion before and I shall certainly take it up with the chairman and my right honourable friend.

Both the noble Lords, Lord Tordoff and Lord Monkswell, talked about this rundown industrial area and I know that the noble Lord, Lord Dean, will confirm that description. It is of course perfectly true. I once spent a very depressing day in the rain just outside the Irlam steelworks with my nursery van that had broken down, so I can certainly testify to an outside observer's view, as it were, of that particular area.

The noble Lord, Lord Monkswell, said that he was in a cleft stick: supporting either the local authorities or the urban development corporation, he would be wrong. Every now and again there is a perceived need to take away such development powers from local authorities. It is not a modern need. It occurred with the institution of the new towns movement and, as I mentioned earlier, it has been seen in the London Docklands and the Merseyside Development Corporation. Quite honestly it is something which I regret, but which must happen when there is a pressing need and local authorities have not proved themselves capable of getting on with the job at speed. I do not accept that it is necessarily because of a lack of government money since much of the money that is involved in this particular corporation will come through existing schemes, though new money will be part of the financing of the corporation.

Lord Tordoff

My Lords, I do not think that the noble Lord will want to give the impression that he is attacking these particular local authorities. I think it is fair to say that in the case of Trafford Park a very successful scheme was stimulated by local authorities with the support of industry and the Government to carry out a survey into the area, and it was completed last year. I just feel that the noble Lord would not wish to give the impression that he may have given.

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, I am very grateful to the noble Lord. I did not intend to castigate those particular local authorities in any way. I was suggesting that this particular corporation may give a little bit of much needed zip to the regeneration of that whole area.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Back to