Dee Estuary (Hansard, 8 February 1974)

§ Mr. Peter Thomas

I announced in the House on 7th August 1972 that the Government had decided to delay a firm decision on the proposals for a multipurpose development of the Dee Estuary until the water storage aspects could be more fully evaluated in the light of the Water Resources Board's report on national strategies for water conservation and supply, and that in the meantime further studies would be undertaken of the likely costs and benefits and, in particular, of the need for improved communications between North Wales and Merseyside.

The Water Resources Board's report has now been published. It is clear that water storage in the Dee Estuary is not required to meet expected demand in the period up to 1981. There is, however, a strong probability that there will be a significant rôle for the estuary in meeting future supply demands, possibly in the early 1990s. The board has suggested a range of options for the period up to the end of the century, and the Government have concluded that the National Water Council should be asked to consider this range of options as the basis for water conservation strategy beyond 1981.

The further examination of the communications network of the Deeside area has confirmed that planned improvements of the existing highway system will meet expected traffic demands into the 1980s without a new crossing of the estuary. It is, however, likely that additional road capacity across the Dee will be required beyond that time, and it would be sensible to associate proposals for such a road crossing with further assessments of the water conservation requirement.

Doubts have been expressed about the effect which the construction of a crossing of the Dee Estuary might have upon future urban and industrial development in north-east Flintshire, an area which is already experiencing a relatively rapid growth in population and an area also which is facing short-term difficulties 507W associated with the proposed rundown in employment in the steel industry. The Government accept that priority must be given to dealing successfully with these immediate and short-term problems.

The implementation of the Dee Estuary project in the longer term would undoubtedly stimulate further growth. The longer-term problems and opportunities are being considered by the local planning authorities in formulating their structure plans, and they will wish to take steps to 508W ensure that urban and industrial growth are provided for in a balanced way. There seems no reason, however, to contemplate at this stage induced growth of the kind suggested in the Shankland Cox Report.

The Government's conclusion is that planning should, therefore, proceed on the basis of the probability that a phased multi-purpose development of the Dee Estuary will be undertaken towards the end of the next decade.