House of Commons Hansard Debates for 24 Feb 1992

Column 781

as effectively as it might be. I am certain that there are parts of the Palace which very few people know exist. One of the joys of being a member of the Select Committee on Broadcasting was that we found a huge area, to which I have referred before, above the Central Lobby which no one knew existed before. It contained the odd plank, bucket and a half empty tea cup. That huge space had not been used before and it could have been used to accommodate the control room for the television studios and also a couple of television studios. When we finally get control over our own affairs--the Bill goes part of the way towards achieving that--I hope that we shall be able to use most effectively all the accommodation presently available in the building. I will raise one other potentially divisive note : I wonder whether the balance of accommodation in the Palace between the amount used by the House of Lords and that used by the House of Commons has changed this century. In asking that question, I break all the rules, because it is a question to which I genuinely do not know the answer. The balance of power between the two Houses has changed this century and the balance of work rate has also inevitably changed this century. I wonder whether the use of the accommodation in the Palace of Westminster reflects the work required to be performed by the two Houses.

We must work towards raising our facilities up to minimum standards for ourselves, staff and visitors. We should also try to improve facilities. The Leader of the House touched on that matter. I look forward to the time when--I am not alone in saying this--hon. Members will have in their rooms the clean feed of the televising of the proceedings of Parliament. It is odd that we can see them via satellite but we cannot do so from a direct feed to our offices. It is odd also that Ministers can do so in their offices but the rest of us cannot. I look forward to resolving that matter in due course. This debate is related to what we shall debate next Monday, which is the procedure of the House of Commons. I do not think that all improvements will necessarily mean additional costs. There are many things that we could do which might reduce costs. For example, why are we here at 10.35 pm debating this matter? Why could we not do so in the morning?

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Tony Baldry) : Why does the hon. Gentleman not sit down then

Mr. Grocott : I shall sit down and be quiet if my two or three minutes over the limit enable us to debate such matters at 9 am instead of at 10.30 pm. They would be three minutes of my time most usefully spent.

With those comments, in particular those underlining the staffing queries, I am happy to support the Bill.

10.35 pm

Mr. A. J. Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed) : Although technical in character, the Bill is the expression of a fundamental change in the way we organise our affairs in the House of Commons. It is part of a process of taking control of the buildings into the hands of hon. Members, a process that began in 1975 with the setting up of the House of Commons Commission, which took the employment of staff under the control of hon. Members. That is not a nominal process, as it would be if the House

Column 782

of Commons Commission were merely a Government body. It is a process in which there is wide representation, indeed, a majority of interests other than those of the Government. That should remain a characteristic of the bodies through which we carry out the responsibilities expressed in the Bill.

For Parliament to be independent, it must regulate its own affairs independently of the Government of the day. The Government come to Parliament to bring forward their legislation and to be answerable to Parliament, but Parliament must control its own affairs. It is therefore a happy occasion that there are the names of members of the Government, the Opposition, Liberal Democrats and other Back-Bench Members on the Bill. That is a necessary feature of the process of ensuring that Parliament is genuinely independent and in control of its own affairs.

10.36 pm

Sir Barney Hayhoe (Brentford and Isleworth) : I endorse what the hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith) has said. Such matters are deeply for the House of Commons, not just Front-Bench Members. It is right and proper that there should be brief interventions from Back-Bench Members in support of the measure. I certainly endorse the commendation of the House.

Question put and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time.

Bill committed to a Committee of the whole House. [Mr. Boswell.]

Bill immediately considered in Committee.

Clause 1

Establishment of a corporation to be known as"the Corporate Officer of the House of Lords"

10.38 pm

Mr. Ray Powell (Ogmore) : I beg to move amendment No. 1, in page 2, line 9, at beginning insert

Except in so far as Her Majesty may by Order in Council otherwise provide'.

The Second Deputy Chairman of Ways and Means (Miss Betty Boothroyd) : With this, it will be convenient to take the following amendments : No. 2, in page 2, line 13, at end insert--

(7) A statutory instrument made in the exercise of the power conferred by subsection (6) above shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution either House of Parliament.'.

No 3, in clause 2, page 2, line 44, at beginning insert Except in so far as Her Majesty may by Order in Council otherwise provide'.

No. 4 in clause 2, page 4, line 48, at end insert--

(7) A statutory instrument made in the exercise of the power conferred by subsection (6) above shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution either House of Parliament.'.

Mr. Powell : As Chairman of the Accommodation and Works Committee, I speak on behalf of my colleagues and, I hope, for the new generation of domestic Select Committees in welcoming the Bill. Initially, with my characteristic Welsh suspicion of being on the receiving end of something spontaneously offered, I wondered whether the Bill was simply a manoeuvre to strengthen further the already formidable influence of the Clerk of the House. But, as I understand

Column 783

it, the Bill seeks only to establish in the form of corporate bodies the legal representative of each House who may, among other things, acquire property and enter into contracts. As such, the Bill gives legal force to the arrangements recommended by Sir Robin Ibbs and approved by the House. All hon. Members will remember the excellent report that Sir Robin Ibbs rendered to the House, which was accepted unanimously and has since been implemented.

The amendments arise out of concern on both sides of the House that the change in the nominal ownership of the parliamentary outbuildings might result in the House being subject to planning procedures in respect of its future building projects which would not have applied if the estate had remained under the control of the Secretary of State for the Environment.

The Bill provides for the transfer of parliamentary outbuildings from the Secretary of State to one or both of the so-called corporate officers. Clauses 1(6) and 2(6) specifically provide that any property so transferred

"shall not be regarded as property of, or property held on behalf of, the Crown."

Although the transfer of ownership and control of the outbuildings to Parliament is to be welcomed, it appears to have the side effect of making the buildings subject to a range of legislation. In the case of most of this legislation, the Accommodation and Works Committee would raise no objections.

However, the Committee is worried that the effect of the Bill could be to impose town and country planning regulations at variance with those that apply to the Palace of Westminster. For this reason, the Accommodation and Works Committee would have wished to move amendments merely to retain or restore Crown immunity to the outbuildings in respect of the town and country planning Acts alone. We have been advised, however, that such amendments to the main Bill would have been difficult, if not impossible, to draft. Instead, we have proposed amendments which would enable Crown immunity to be restored to the outbuildings in respect of special legislation. Any statutory instrument to that effect would be subject to amendment in pursuance of a resolution of either House.

The purpose of the amendments is to allow planning for phase 2 of the new parliamentary buildings to proceed as if the parliamentary outbuildings had continued to enjoy immunity as Crown property. They are designed for no other purpose, and we would not expect the additional powers included in the amendments to be used to claim immunity from other legislation.

These are minor amendments which will assist the House in proceeding with the programme to provide adequate office accommodation for all Members and their staff. They have the unanimous support of the Accommodation and Works Committee. I hope that the Government and the House will support them.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment made : No. 2, in page 2, line 13, at end insert (7) A statutory instrument made in the exercise of the power conferred by subsection (6) above shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament'.-- [Mr. Ray Powell.]

Clause 1, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Column 784

Clause 2

Establishment of a corporation to be known as "the Corporate Officer of the House of Commons"

Amendments made : No. 3, in page 2, line 44, at beginning insert--

Except in so far as Her Majesty may by Order in Council otherwise provide'.

No. 4, in page 2, line 48, at end insert--

(7) A statutory instrument made in the exercise of the power conferred by subsection (6) above shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament'.-- [Mr. Ray Powell.]

Clause 2, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 3 to 8 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported, with amendments ; as amended, considered. Bill read the Third time, and passed.

STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS, &c.

Motion made, and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 101(5) (Standing Committees on Statutory Instruments, &c.), That the draft Farm Woodland Premium Scheme 1992, which was laid before this House on 31st January, be approved.-- [Mr. Boswell.] Question agreed to.

Motion made, and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 101(5) (Standing Committees on Statutory Instruments, &c.) and Order [6 February],

That the draft revised Code of Practice on picketing, which was laid before this House on 4th February, be approved.-- [Mr. Boswell.]

Question agreed to.

EUROPEAN COMMUNITY DOCUMENTS

Motion made, and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 102(9) (European Standing Committees),

Carbon dioxide emissions and energy efficiency

That this House takes note of European Community Document No. 8918/91, relating to Community strategy to limit carbon dioxide emissions and to improve energy efficiency, and the Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum submitted by the Department of the Environment on behalf of HM Treasury, the Department of the Environment and the Department of Energy on 11th February 1992 ; welcomes the conclusions of the joint Energy/Environment Council of Ministers on 13th December and of ECOFIN on 16th December as a positive step forward in agreeing a coherent and co-ordinated approach across the Community to limiting carbon dioxide emissions ; endorses the Government's view that further analytical work on the likely effects of any Community-wide energy/carbon tax is required before any decision on such a tax can be taken ; and supports the Government's intention to continue to work towards its conditional target of returning United Kingdom carbon dioxide emissions to 1990 levels by 2005, as part of the international efforts to combat the threat of climate change.-- [Mr. Boswell.]

Question agreed to.

Motion made, and Question put forthwith pursuant to Standing Order No. 102(9) (European Standing Committees),

Free Movement of Medicinal Products

That this House takes note of European Community Document No. 10089/90 and the Supplementary Explanatory Memorandum submitted by the Department of Health on 30th April 1991, and European Community Document No. 9490/91, relating to the free movement of medicinal products ; and supports the Government's view that the proposals are

Column 785

acceptable in principle, subject to detailed improvements to the text primarily to ensure that the health and safety of the United Kingdom human and animal populations are fully protected.-- [Mr. Boswell.]

Question agreed to.

Column 786

PETITIONS

Kashmir (Human Rights)

10.46 pm

Mr. Ken Hargreaves (Hyndburn) : I beg leave to present a petition to support the right of the people of Kashmir to self-determination. It is signed by Mr. Mohammed Younis of 61 Nuttall street, Accrington and 637 others, most of them my constituents. They express their concern, which I share, about the situation in Kashmir and the failure of the world community to give the problems of Kashmir the attention which justice demands. They urge the United Nations to seek to ensure that a plebiscite, which was the subject of successful United Nations resolutions, be carried out to ascertain the will of the people of Jammu and Kashmir in relation to the state's final disposition.

The petition states :

Wherefore your petitioners pray that your honourable house will condemn the systematic mass murders, torture, arson and rape by the Indian forces of occupation in Kashmir, promote international efforts to help refugees fleeing Kashmir and to relieve the hardship and suffering of the people who remain in the territory, demand that India permit Amnesty International and other independent human rights agencies to enter Kashmir with a view to investigating and reporting on human rights violations and calls for the withdrawal of India's armed forces and security forces from the state of Jammu and Kashmir and their replacement by an interim United Nations administration with the task of restoring law and order, and as soon as practicable conducting the said plebiscite.

To lie upon the Table.

Puppies (Tail-docking)

Mr. Hargreaves : The second petition is signed by Mr. and Mrs. Smith of 312 Willows lane, Accrington and the members of the Council of Docked Breeds and

sheweth that we wish to retain our rights to dock our puppies tails as in time honoured tradition and to prevent serious damage and injury in adulthood.

Wherefore your petitioners pray that your honourable House revoke the June 1991 amendment to the Veterinary Act of 1966.

And your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray etc. To lie upon the Table.

Mifegyne

Mr. Hargreaves : This petition is against the drug RU486, which destroys life and risks damaging the health of women. As someone who believes that life is sacred and begins at the moment of conception, I am happy to support the petition, signed by Mr. Barrie Price of 54 Palace road, Ripon, and 47 residents of north Yorkshire. The petition says :

we the undersigned wish to note with regret that, the abortion pill Mifegyne known as RU486 has been granted a product licence. We believe that drugs and medicines should be used only to save life. We deplore the fact that this drug causes the death of unborn human beings and we express our grave concern that it will damage women physically and psychologically.

Wherefore your petitioners pray that your honourable House, which is committed to upholding respect for human life and protection of the weak and vulnerable, will do

Column 787

everything possible to prevent the distribution and use of RU486 and any other drug which, like it, are produced with the deliberate intention of destroying innocent human life.

And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray etc. To lie upon the Table.

Column 788

Water Depletion (East Anglia)

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.-- [Mr. Boswell.]

10.49 pm

Mr. Patrick Thompson (Norwich, North) : I am grateful for the opportunity to raise the subject of drought and water depletion in East Anglia. My staff and I did not realise how much information was available and we have been positively inundated with information and technical material.

I thank my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment for attending the debate and I hope that he will respond positively to the various points I shall raise. I should also like to thank Anglian Water, the National Rivers Authority, the National Farmers Union, Norfolk county council, the Council for the Protection of Rural England and others who have provided me with a great deal of information. That has enabled me to present a speech full of material and I hope that it will stimulate debate. The purpose of tonight's debate is to highlight the drought in East Anglia and to press for further debate, education and long- term planning so that the threat to water supplies, caused by increasing demand and possible climate change, can be averted.

It is not so many months ago that I had a debate in the early hours of the morning on global warming. There is a link between that and drought. At a recent conference at the United Nations, the organiser, Gordon Young, said :

"A change in climate may mean changes in precipitation patterns and quantities, changes in evaporation and, consequently dramatic changes in water resources. Rivers may flow less predictably, with altered discharges."

He also said that there would be just as important consequences for ground- water supplies. The question of climate change is relevant when one thinks about the long-term future of our water supplies. In the county of Norfolk there is increasing discussion among the press, farmers, business men and consumers about water depletion. Everywhere I go in Norfolk people continually remind me of the fact that we are, for some reason, exporting water from Norfolk via Thetford to the more populated areas of Cambridge. That is a controversial practice and people are arguing about it because it is causing concern.

The university of East Anglia's school of environmental sciences is embarking on a three-year research contract funded by the NRA. The object of that research is to look at the relationship between climate change and river flows in East Anglia over 20 years. That research will use the inter- disciplinary approach, which is a particular strength of the university. This is an opportunity to draw attention to the good work that is done at the school of environmental sciences. That research will address whether there has been a real deterioration in river flows in that 20 years. The drought has now entered its 43rd month according to the NRA and the facts about water depletion during that time are staggering. The authority reported recently that the 41 months to the end of December proved to be the longest dry period this century with only 79 per cent. of normal rainfall. Furthermore, rainfall was below average in 32 months, average in two months and above

Column 789

average in seven months only. The results of those statistics suggest that an accumulative deficit of approximately 18 inches developed during that time.

Those 18 inches represent nine full months of rainfall for the region. East Anglia has suffered in particular, because it is acknowledged to be one of the driest areas with an annual rainfall of 600 mm only. The current demand for rainfall demands 200 per cent. over the average in the next three months in order to achieve levels prevailing prior to the drought. That dramatic increase is an impossibility according to the NRA and all other groups monitoring the situation. If there were such a dramatic increase in rainfall it would cause serious flooding and other damage to the environment. Those to whom I have spoken generally agree that there needs to be stricter control over abstraction licences. In the past few weeks when I have been studying the subject, I have become increasingly aware of the apparent abuses in the water industry involving over-abstraction. The drought has been affected by abstraction to an extent that merits further study and possible re-evaluation. The University of East Anglia has begun the process of studying the effects of gravel extraction, sewage and farming on the flow rates of the Wensum, the Nar and the Bure rivers. Its work is an important starting point for determining what has led to the drought in East Anglia, over and above the lack of rainfall. We are studying whether the drought is caused by over-use of the water supply or by population flows into the region and house building.

There is a serious lack of knowledge about domestic water conservation. I believe, as do many people, that water metering must be introduced as quickly as possible. I therefore support the campaign by the Council for the Protection of Rural England and others for better water management. I also support the idea of a two-part tariff, where charges increase for excess use, which will promote water conservation and, at the same time, be fair to less well off consumers.

I reject the argument that the cost of introducing water meters is such that it would not be worth while for individual consumers to pay that capital cost because they would not recoup it in their lifetime. We must encourage Anglian Water and water authorities throughout the country to introduce metering as fast as possible. I have some knowledge of its use in France where it works well, is popular and results in cheaper bills for many people. Let us get a move on with water metering.

Ground water extraction has reached its highest level in the history of East Anglia. The growth in extraction is a response to present and future population increases. The planning policies of the Department of the Environment and local councils have been challenged regularly in the local press, the media and local debates as the seriousness of the water supply problem has become clearer. Does my hon. Friend the Minister agree that we must look at the law and practice involved in licence distribution? The current drought, coupled with over-licensing, has severely damaged rivers and therefore streams. Over-extraction means more than water depletion. Concern is also being expressed about its effects on the ecosystem in Norfolk generally. Unfortunately, I do not have time in this short debate to give chapter and verse examples, but my hon. Friend the Minister will be aware of them, as much publicity has been given to them.

Column 790

I am informed that the National Rivers Authority has granted licences to almost every application from Anglian Water over the past year, which shows the need for careful monitoring of current practices. The National Rivers Authority originally turned down an application in Norfolk on the grounds

"that the proposed increase in abstraction would significantly affect low flows in the nearby water course, and that the impact upon the fishery, local amenity and the maintenance of water quality downstream of East Rudham sewage treatment works would be unacceptable".

My hon. Friend the Minister may not be aware that his officials at the Department of the Environment reversed that decision on appeal. That causes me even more concern than the point that I put a few moments ago.

In the midst of the current drought, there has been no decline in the number of licences being distributed. There is therefore a strong case for a moratorium on all new licences until resources are allowed to replenish themselves.

A recent article in the Eastern Daily Press --it was written by Roger Southwell of the National Farmers Union--took up the issue of agriculture and irrigation. Time does not allow me to quote the article but it is important to realise that a long-term irrigation plan is needed. During the past few weeks I have been convinced by discussions that irrigation is important to agriculture and that it is important to educate the public to appreciate the significance of that. If irrigation were to stop, there would be higher food prices and job losses, for example. As I have said, there must be a plan for irrigation. It is not good enough to say that it can be switched on and off, as it were. There must be a long-term plan. The need for that was emphasised in the article to which I have referred. It is the NRA that imposes irrigation restrictions whereas the Anglian water authority controls the watering of gardens, golf courses and so on.

If there is difficulty in finding water for irrigation, in spite of the importance which I attach to irrigation, as do farmers in Norfolk, the authorities have a duty to provide incentives to farmers to build their own storage facilities. After all, ground water is available during the winter. It should be feasible for those who are involved in farming or horticulture to build storage facilities so that more water is available for irrigation if the effects of drought are to continue in the longer term.

The NRA had distributed a launch-of-options study, which clearly outlines a plan for future water demand management. Indeed, the purpose of my speech is to get across the idea that we need a long-term plan for water demand management and control. The NRA has produced a good report but one aspect of it disturbs me. Unfortunately, I do not have time to quote from the report, but there is constant reference to there being no single solution, to there being no great urgency and to studies taking a great deal of time. That approach concerns me. The message that I want to convey to the NRA through my hon. Friend the Minister, and perhaps in other ways, is that although the study is good, and the ideas set out in it are acceptable, it is unfortunate that it does not highlight a sense of urgency. I therefore make a plea to the NRA to show a greater sense of urgency in its approach to these matters.

If we are to solve the problems that stem from water shortage, assuming that they continue into the future as a result of climate change or population increase, or for

Column 791

whatever other reason, it is important that people are educated to conserve water by using water-efficient appliances and by encouraging general reductions in consumption. These are the tools that we can use to begin an effective campaign to increase public knowledge. Future home owners should be encouraged to understand the basics of water usage. A long-term conservation campaign should start now. I hope that my hon. Friend the Minister will have something to say about that, especially as I do not have time to say much about such a campaign.

The Council for the Protection of Rural England and the NRA, in presenting their case for demand management of water supply, have discussed the imbalance in the distribution of available water resources in different parts of the country. In the longer term, I believe that there will need to be inter-regional transfers, even if there is not a national network of pipelines. I have even heard it suggested that when the extra carriageway is built on the A1--an important north-south road--the opportunity should be taken to lay a pipeline. That makes sense. After all, the sort of transfer that I am talking about is common in the Mediterranean and in other areas. Many of us have gone sightseeing in Provence and seen the Pont du Gard and other great works built many years ago. If that could be done then, it can be done now. Long distance water transfer must be considered seriously.

While I am on the subject of major projects that may have to be considered. I would like to mention the Wash barrage. Recent correspondence in the local press has asked why, 20 years ago, we did not grasp the opportunity to build that barrage. Many of our problems of water supply and flood control in Fenland would not be costing us so much now if the requisite investment had been put into the Wash barrage some years ago.

We have an eccentric approach to public finance in this country. It may have something to do with the way in which the Treasury works. We do not seem to be able to spend big money now to save even greater expenditure in the future. I know that my hon. Friend is not in a position to respond to that more general point, but we need to think long term. If large investments are necessary for the long term, we may save ourselves money by making those investments.

The problems in East Anglia and elsewhere are the legacy of a failure to recognise the problems soon enough and to get our strategy for the future right. I hope to be able to persuade my hon. Friend and others responsible that ad hoc responses will not suffice ; long-term strategic planning and action are required, in all the ways that I have mentioned in this brief survey. I look forward to my hon. Friend's response, and I thank him once again for being here. 11.7 pm

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Tony Baldry) : My hon. Friend the Member for Norwich, North (Mr. Thompson) has done the House a service by raising this subject tonight and setting out the issues with characteristic clarity of thought and balance of argument. I welcome the opportunity to

Column 792

explain the problems being caused by the current dry spell both throughout the country as a whole and, more particularly, in East Anglia.

The national situation is difficult and is under constant review. Over the last three and a half years rainfall has been below average. Never since records began has a spell of this nature extended beyond two consecutive years. Nineteen eighty nine was the driest year since 1976 ; and the 13- month period to March 1991 was the third driest this century. The period from November 1988 to January 1992 was the driest for over 200 years in the Anglian region, an area which in average conditions is also the driest in the United Kingdom. Over the last six months, rainfall over England and Wales has been about 35 per cent. below average while the December and January rainfall was the third lowest this century. No one should be in any doubt about the scale of the challenge, therefore.

The situation next summer will be heavily influenced by the amount of rainfall over the next two months. If it is not well above average, eastern and south-east England could face a critical situation. These weather conditions, particularly in the east of England, have brought home the fact that our water is valuable and is a finite resource.

In the Water Act 1989, this Government ensured the proper stewardship of water by appointing a separate body, the National Rivers Authority, with responsibility for judicious management of resources, balancing the demands of users against the need to maintain and enhance the water environment. The NRA has clear and coherent statutory powers. The largest users of water are the water companies which, under the Act and subsequent consolidating legislation, have in their licences responsibility for the adequacy and quality of public water supplies.

What is being done to safeguard the public from the effects of dry weather? It goes without saying that, whatever else the Government can do, they cannot make it rain. If it rains heavily and consistently over the next two months, the problem will become much less widespread. If it does not, we shall be faced with another summer of restrictions and possibly shortages in many southern and eastern areas.

I must re-emphasise the roles of the NRA and the water companies. Under section 19 of the Water Resources Act 1991 The NRA has a duty to conserve, redistribute and otherwise augment water resources in England and Wales while, under section 37 of the Water Industry Act 1991, the companies must develop and maintain an efficient and economical system of water supply in their areas. My Department has a supervisory role over them, but the NRA and the water companies must play the active part by fulfilling their functions.

I have asked officials in my Department shortly to meet officials from the NRA and the water companies to discuss contingency arrangements for the areas most likely to be affected should the worst occur. What form the arrangements will take is as yet difficult to predict. It depends upon a number of factors, not least rainfall. However, I should like to mention some action that has already been taken.

While investment in the water industry declined by 27 per cent. in the last half of the 1970s, it rose by 51 per cent. in the 1980s under Conservative government and the progress made helped to produce an additional 10 gallons of water for every man, woman and child each day. That momentum is accelerating under the privatised regime.

Next Section

Home Page