Durham Coalfield: Water Pumping Policy (Hansard, 22 February 1994)

§ The Minister of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Strathclyde)
My Lords, it is an offence under the Water Resources Act 1991 to cause the pollution of a water course. British Coal is in close touch with the National Rivers Authority, which is responsible for enforcing this legislation.

§ Lord Dormand of Easington
My Lords, is the Minister aware that the National Rivers Authority, which he has just mentioned, stated recently that the Durham coalfield would produce a pollution bombshell if British Coal switched off the pumps and that there would be discharges of water within three months and eventually a discharge of 4.5 million gallons a day into the rivers? Does the Minister not agree that the peculiar 516 attitude that is now being adopted by British Coal is closely linked to privatisation and that the Government really ought to be doing much more on this matter, particularly in view of the disappointing Answer that the Minister has just given me?

§ Lord Strathclyde
My Lords, first, I am sorry that the noble Lord found my Answer disappointing. I thought that it was rather a clear Answer. Secondly, I can tell the House that this has nothing to do with privatisation. It is the current law and current statutes that deal with the pollution emanating from mines. In respect of the current situation in the Durham coalfield, I understand that British Coal met the NRA on 1st February to discuss the latest position and that British Coal is currently considering what the next step should be. My understanding is that it will seek to reach an agreement with the NRA before making any changes to its pumping programme.

§ Lord Mason of Barnsley
My Lords, is the Minister aware that in the case of the River Wear halting pumping could result in a low flow? The river will then be unable to cope with the normal effluent, there will be an increase in pollution and a good salmon/trout river in the North will be ruined. In many other cases— not necessarily Durham and the River Wear— pumping having ceased from coal mines, there becomes an overflow of obnoxious, coloured water which flows into rivers, streams and meadows causing great environmental damage. There is a danger that water supplies might be contaminated. The Minister mentioned the Water Resources Act 1991, which requires British Coal not to cause pollution. What are the Department of the Environment and the National Rivers Authority doing about prosecuting the many cases which come to their knowledge?

§ Lord Strathclyde
My Lords, the noble Lord's interest in salmon and trout fishing is known throughout the House. He is a great champion of the cause of river anglers and it is right that he should have an interest in this matter. I cannot comment on individual cases. However, I confirm that the subject is of great interest to the Departments of Trade and Industry and the Environment as well as to the National Rivers Authority and British Coal. The Government are committed to reviewing the legal framework for discharges from abandoned mines. The Department of Environment is taking the review forward in tandem with a broader review of contaminated land liabilities.

§ Lord Merlyn-Rees
My Lords, who will be responsible for the large number of unworked collieries which are natural wells, as my noble friend described? In South Wales rust coloured water is flowing into the River Taff down into Cardiff. Who will be responsible for the situation once British Coal is no more? Will the private owners pay to pump out the water or will the Government pay? The matter does not need a review; it needs a decision.

§ Lord Strathclyde
My Lords, the decision has been made. The Coal Bill, which is before another place and 517 will soon come to this House, deals precisely with this aspect. Current abandoned mines will become the responsibility of the new Coal Authority.

§ Lord Morris of Castle Morris
My Lords, first, will the Minister accept our warmest congratulations if, as I have been told, today is his 34th birthday, and our astonishment that one so young can be so wise? Secondly, given that whenever the build-up of water in closed mine workings takes place gases are forced towards the surface, will the Minister tell the House what the Government are doing about the methane build-up in flooded mines?

§ Lord Strathclyde
My Lords, I accept the noble Lord's felicitations and his flattery. I hope I can convince him that that wisdom will continue for a long time. British Coal and its successor body, the Coal Authority, will have a specific safety duty, which includes a safety duty concerning methane.

§ Baroness Nicol
My Lords, I am unclear about the answer which the Minister gave to my noble friend Lord Merlyn-Rees. Is he suggesting that the legislation which is about to be introduced will be retrospective? My noble friend's question related to existing problems which show themselves only long after the closure of the pits.

§ Lord Strathclyde
My Lords, all the current liabilities of British Coal will be passed to the successor body.

§ Lord Dormand of Easington
My Lords, is the Minister aware that my disappointment is based largely on the lack of urgency in the replies that he has given, not only to me but to my noble friends? All the pits in Durham and in the North East are closed and therefore it cannot be long, before a decision must be made. Furthermore, is the Minister aware that County Durham had more than 203 pits in operation? Those workings still exist and in some cases they are linked. Therefore, flooding and pollution are a major issue and I hope that the Minister will take a more urgent view.

§ Lord Strathclyde
My Lords, it is not a question of lack of urgency; the matter becomes urgent only if the pumps are to be shut down. There is no evidence to suggest that that is to take place. That, quite properly, is a decision for British Coal to take after consultation with the NRA.