§ General Sir G. Jeffreysasked the Minister of Agriculture why objectors to the scheme for making the whole of the rivers Meon, Itchen and Test main rivers in the Hampshire River Board area, were given no opportunity of fully stating their case; and whether, in the event of any statutory body putting forward objections, he will grant a public inquiry into the matter.
§ General Sir G. Jeffreysasked the Minister of Agriculture (1) why the report of Sir William Gavin's committee on the main river scheme for the Hampshire River Board area was disregarded by his Department, in view of the fact that the report vindicated the attitude of the landowners in respect of the correct agricultural treatment of the valley land;
(2) what is the estimated annual cost of the proposed scheme defining main river for the Hampshire River Board area; and whether the cost will fall on the Hampshire county rates.
Mr. T. WilliamsFull discussions were held with the interests mainly concerned before a map was prepared defining main river in the Hampshire River Board area. Thereafter, all persons had the opportunity for which the Act provides of objecting to the Minister's proposals. No formal objection was in fact made by any public authority in the area. I do not accept the view that the interests concerned had not the fullest opportunity of considering the matter and making known the grounds of any objection.
The definition of main river determines solely the watercourses for which the 340W River Board will be responsible and is not concerned with the works that should or should not be done on them. That is a matter for the River Board itself to decide. The report referred to deals with the question of works and is not relevant to the definition of main river. Similarly, I cannot say what expenditure is likely to be incurred in the area as this depends on decisions of the River Board. Any expenditure will, of course, fall to be met in the manner provided for by the River Boards Act, 1948.