Water Companies: Land Use (Hansard, 29 November 1988)

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, most of the land which is transferred to the new water utility companies will continue to be required for operational purposes.
However, like their predecessors, the water utility companies will want to dispose of any surplus land holdings; but in national parks and areas of outstanding natural beauty, land is subject to stringent planning controls which severely limit the scope for unsuitable development.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, I thank the noble Earl for that reply. Does he agree that, as has already been said, part of the country's national silver has already been flogged off and now a great part of our real estate is at risk? Does he agree that the people who live in or visit many parts of rural England are concerned at the risk to those lovely pieces of our land? Will he say whether the new owners will have the right to sell those beauty spots or block access to them?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, from an environmental viewpoint, the Government have continually exhibited a mindful attitude to areas of outstanding natural beauty and national parks. The privatised companies must be free to dispose of any land that they no longer require for operational purposes. Land in national parks and areas of outstanding beauty is subject, I repeat, to stringent planning controls which would prevent an unsuitable use of agricultural or forestry land disposed of by a new water plc.

§ Lord Dean of Beswick
My Lords, is the Minister aware that large slices of the land about which he is talking were taken from local authorities against their will without one penny of compensation being paid to them? In all fairness, if there is any surplus land, should it not be handed back to them to market for the benefit of their ratepayers and not flogged off to private speculators?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, whether to dispose of land surplus to requirements will be entirely a decision for the new water plcs in conjunction with my right honourable friend the Secretary of State.

§ Lord Mason of Barnsley
My Lords, is the Minister aware that the nine water authorities in England have 350,000 acres of land, most of which is in areas of natural beauty? They have a duty and a responsibility to the state to preserve it at the moment. Will there be a legislative requirement in the new Act? Secondly, is he aware that there are 29 water companies in this country, as distinct from the water authorities, which are now being invaded by foreign interests, especially the French? If that state happens to obtain a major shareholding in one British water company, what safeguards will there be against its selling land, especially in areas of natural beauty?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Mason, mentioned the recent French dealings in water company shares. As I am sure he realises, the French companies have long experience of operating a privatised water industry. They can extend and diversify their operations. Privatisation will lift legal restrictions and give English water authorities and companies a strong base to develop similar international interests. We do not discriminate against international investment.

§ Lord Glenamara
My Lords, is the noble Earl really telling us that the companies which buy the water authorities will be able to sell the tens of thousands of acres surrounding Thirlmere and Hawes Water in the Lake District? Are not those areas just as much part of our national heritage as Westminster Abbey and the Mappa Mundi? Is it not utterly wrong that they should be sold to private individuals?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, of course the Lake District and other areas which the noble Lord mentioned are extremely sensitive, but, as I said in my original Answer, the same vigorous and rigorous planning restrictions will apply.

§ Lord Glenamara
My Lords, will the noble Earl answer my question? Is it true that the whole of the Thirlmere basin and the Hawes Water basin could be sold to private individuals? Will he answer that question yes or no?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, that is a question I cannot answer at this moment, but in the interests of your Lordships' House I shall reply to the noble Lord in writing.

§ Lord Mackie of Benshie
My Lords, is the noble Earl aware that the reason the French drink so much wine is that their water is so bad?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, no. I have been to France many times and I have enjoyed both their wine and their water.

Lord Morris
My Lords, was it not from individuals that the water companies obtained the land in the first place?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, forgive me, but I did not quite get my noble friend's question.

Lord Morris
My Lords, was it not from individuals that the water authorities obtained the land in the first place?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I am not sure that I see the constructive point that my noble friend is trying to make.

Lord Morris
My Lords, bearing in mind the question of the noble Lord opposite who suggested that there was something wrong in the water authorities selling land to individuals or independent interests, surely it was individuals from whom the water corporations obtained the land in the first place.

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I believe that my noble friend is correct on that point.

Lord Hunt
My Lords, is the noble Earl aware that there are water catchment areas outside the national parks which have not necessarily been designated as areas of outstanding natural beauty but which have great scenic and recreational value for the public, such as the Elan valley in the county of Powys, which at present is safeguarded for public access by the Birmingham Corporation Act 1892? Will he assure the House that that area and other areas of great recreational and environmental value will be safeguarded for the public and from restrictive commercial development under the private ownership of water?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, it would be wrong and improper were I to give the noble Lord that assurance. Areas such as those mentioned by the noble Lord may or may not become vacant for planning permission, but at the moment it is impossible to say.

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, does the noble Earl recognise that his answers so far have given no comfort whatever to those of us who fear not only an ecological and natural disaster but also a financial disaster? That is in exactly the sense of the kind of sell-off we had of the Royal Ordnance factories and the undervaluation of the land that was bought on privatisation. Will the noble Earl give the House an assurance that there will be a full, complete, up-to-date and realistic valuation of all the land assets of the water authorities before privatisation is enacted?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, to answer the noble Lord, the prospectuses of the successor companies will contain sufficient information to enable investors to take proper account of land holdings and value in deciding whether to apply for shares. The price for the shares will therefore properly reflect the value likely to be placed on the land. There are important constraints on the ability of a water company to realise the value underlying operational land; there are legal obligations to maintain services and there 185 are practical obstacles to transferring operations from one site to another.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, can the noble Earl confirm that this British land and British water could be purchased by representatives of foreign governments? Even when British people buy these assets they will be able to sell them off to representatives of private organisations or foreign governments. Can the Minister say whether maintenance standards will be met and the necessary improvements made? It will cost a lot of money.
Is not the reason that the Government are doing this that they did not have the courage to maintain the water undertakings themselves? Ultimately the private owners will see to it that the consumers—the British people—will have to pay in order to make them handsome profits.

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, with great respect to the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, the Government are never short of courage. Perhaps I may suggest that many of the points which the noble Lord, Lord Molloy, is making might be better discussed at the stage of Second Reading.