St. David's Airfield, Dyfed: Transmitter (Hansard, 8 May 1990)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (The Earl of Arran)
My Lords, in his address to the Countryside Commission conference to mark the 40th anniversary of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949, on 13th December last year, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Environment referred to the principles against which any proposal to locate a major development within a national park should be judged.
The announcement by my honourable friend the Member for Plymouth, Sutton, on 30th March that he had decided in principle to embark upon the trial of an over-the-horizon radar which would involve the construction of a transmitter at St. David's airfield in Dyfed was entirely consistent with this statement.

Lord Hunt
My Lords, I thank the noble Earl for that Answer. According to my information, this installation will extend over a distance of about a mile. It will consist of numerous masts of about 120 feet in height, linked by wires. In the light of that information, does the noble Earl not agree that the installation will have a damaging and even a devastating impact on the landscape within the national park? Is he aware that at the proposed site the installation will be seen for many miles along the heritage coast footpath around St. David's Head, as well as inland?
Does the noble Earl not agree that his Answer is in contradiction to the policy of the Government concerning national parks? Can he say whether it has been shown that there is no possible alternative and that there is an overriding need for this site? I shall be very grateful if the noble Earl can reassure me on those points.

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I am happy to be able to say that I can reassure the noble Lord on those points. We are sensitive to the objections concerning national parks. We are committed to consulting very fully the local planning authority and the Countryside Commission over any significant development within a national park. St. David's airfield was selected as the location for the transmitter only after an exhaustive search for suitable sites. In all, some 160 sites were examined. Our proposals, which will be submitted to the local planning authority, will fully examine the need for appropriate landscaping to minimise the impact upon the environment.

§ Lord Kennet
My Lords, can the Government confirm that the installation is for the use of the United States armed forces and that the British Government are, naturally, contributing to the cost? Can the Minister please tell us how much the British contribution will be? What will happen if the Americans take the installation away, as it is a speciality of the installation that it is moveable from site to site?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, a memorandum of agreement between the United Kingdom and the United States to cover the joint trial was signed on 20th April this year. Broadly speaking, it provides for the United States to supply the equipment and remove it again if it is decided not to retain it after the trial; for the United Kingdom to provide and prepare the sites; and for the running costs to be shared. All information from the trial will be shared. The cost of the trial is estimated at about £15.5 million.

§ Lord Crickhowell
My Lords, does my noble friend agree with me that it is always wise to wait for all the facts before reaching conclusions? However, will he accept from me, a former Member of Parliament for the area who used to live at St. David's, that local anxieties have been greatly magnified by the not very happy way in which the matter was handled initially, which included the sending of a letter to the wrong Member of Parliament? Perhaps I may say how welcome it therefore is that the Minister, Alan Clark, is now to address a public meeting at St. David's. I should like to ask that all information, including the medical information and accurate information about the size and shape of the facility, is made available so that those of us who are anxious about the matter can reach a judgment on fact and not on surmise.

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, my noble friend is quite correct. The facts, through the means of representation and consultation, will be made fully available. As he rightly said, my honourable friend the Minister for Defence Procurement will be visiting the site on Thursday and will do his very best to allay fears that may exist in the area, which, as my noble friend said, have been very much exaggerated by the local press.

§ Lord Graham of Edmonton
My Lords, in view of the signs of deétente all round, not least from the 1233 Eastern bloc and Russia, have the Government carried out any reassessment of the strategic need for the facility at this time and at this site? In view of the damaging impact on the environment and on tourism locally, will the noble Earl bear in mind that the militarisation of yet another area of Britain is directly contrary to the Government's environmental aspirations?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I say straight away to the noble Lord that the requirement to protect the United Kingdom from air attack will continue for the foreseeable future. Over-the-horizon radar can enhance the effectiveness of meeting that requirement. The problem, if any, that may be caused for tourism will be addressed in the environmental impact assessment when that is made.

§ Lord Parry
My Lords, will the Government accept that the old county of Pembrokeshire has had a long and close association with the Ministry of Defence and is as faithful to the concept of the defence of the country as any Minister in this House or in another place? Will they further accept that the concerns expressed by the local people—perhaps out of lack of knowledge—have not necessarily been magnified by the local press? Indeed, as a regular reader of it over the past 50 years, I happen to believe that the local press has truly reflected concerns in the district. Those concerns may be met by the Minister's visit—certainly his visit is welcome—but the House would be ill advised to assume that the people of Pembrokeshire are concerned for no reason.

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I hasten to reassure the noble Lord that in no way do we minimise the possible impact of the facility in that location. Therefore everything possible is being done to make the local inhabitants fully aware of what will happen. There will be a formal presentation by the United Kingdom and the United States in the locality towards the end of this year.

§ Lord Cledwyn of Penrhos
My Lords, does the noble Earl agree that this is one of the most historic and revered areas in Wales and indeed in the United Kingdom? Does he further agree that the wishes and views of the local inhabitants must be treated with great respect? What is the reaction of Dyfed County Council, the local district council and the Council for National Parks to the proposal?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I think I am right in saying that there is natural apprehension in the area about the proposal. But as I have also said, things will become clearer in the light of the new consultation which is about to take place.

Viscount Tonypandy
My Lords, in view of the comments from those who know the area best, will we have an opportunity to discuss the matter or will the Minister take the decision in the light of the information he will gather? Will we have a further chance to discuss the matter?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, I am not completely certain how to answer the noble Viscount's question, but it probably could be done through the usual channels.

§ Baroness Nicol
My Lords, as the locality is likely to lose some of the benefits of toursim as a result of this development, what investigations have been made about the effect on employment during and after the building of the installation? Will there be any permanent jobs to comfort the local residents? Will the installation be built by local labour or will people be brought in from outside?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, the building of the installation will be put out to tender. The other points raised by the noble Baroness will be fully considered in the environmental impact assessment.

§ Lord Rochester
My Lords, since, as I understand it, no planning permission is required before this unsightly transmitter is erected, is there any prospect of some independent means being used to balance the interests of national defence against the disfigurement of St. David's Head?

§ The Earl of Arran
My Lords, the noble Lord is correct that although the Crown is formally exempt from planning legislation it is our practice to follow the normal planning consultation procedure as laid down, in this case by the Welsh Office.