| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Bill Walker (North Tayside): The hon. Gentleman should bear it in mind that land is a finite resource and water is not.
6.15 pm
Mr. Hogg: I have always known that the hon. Gentleman is a philosopher. I may not be able to sleep tonight, because I will be thinking about that interesting idea. I shall look for him tomorrow to tell him my thoughts on it.
I believe that we should agree to this reasonable new clause. Goodness knows why the Government always think of reasons why they should not be sensible. I am sure that they will run true to form tonight and resist our new clause. I hope that my hon. Friend the Member for Leith will not cave in, as he did on a previous occasion. I urge him to press the matter to a Division.
Mr. Thomas Graham (Renfrew, West and Inverclyde):
As many hon. Members will know, my constituency was devastated by floods in 1994. Many people suffered an unbelievably horrific winter: they were forced from their homes, their houses were ruined and their lives were destroyed. Those folk have now returned to their homes, but they continue to fear further flooding. At the time, my constituents did not know who would come to their rescue--they expected some Government help, but this Government certainly did not provide it. It was said at the time that the Government had left them high and dry. Assistance from central Government was certainly a long time in coming.
The local councils did their best. They did not know where the money would come from or how they would deal with the problems created by the floods. [Interruption.] I hope that the Minister is listening--he seems to be paying more attention to his hon. Friend the Member for North Tayside (Mr. Walker), who talks with finesse about water.
My constituents had to wait a long time to receive assistance. On one occasion, my hon. Friend the hon. Member for Glasgow, Provan (Mr. Wray) and I visited a family at 1.30 am. We waded through 2.5 ft of stinking sewage which surrounded my constituent's house. Families could not get out and about. The fire service was doing its damnedest to assist people: it was pumping water, but was making little progress as the rain was torrential and the drains were blocked with debris. The Minister must give local authorities real powers and real finance.
Just a week ago, a constituent of mine was going bananas because the river outside her house had nearly reached flood level, and she was imagining what it would be like when the water came over. Madam Deputy Speaker, you are a woman. You can imagine how my constituent felt when she got up and saw sewage all over her house, her carpets and kitchen stinking of bog and human dirt.
The Minister knows about that case, because I have written to him a number of times. I plead with him not to let my constituents suffer that indignity once again. Surely the local authority should be given the power to act quickly in an emergency. However, it takes intensive manpower. Last weekend, dozens of men came out with sandbags. That cost money, but the people who are living in fear of flooding cannot but look to the Government and to local government to give them some security.
I shall finish, Madam Deputy Speaker, because I promised to speak for only five minutes, although I could speak for five hours on this subject. The folk who
get flooded live in my village, in Linwood. I saw them all the time. It broke my heart to see people at Christmas whose toys and everything else for which they had worked had been ruined.
Sir Hector Monro (Dumfries):
I am interested in the compelling case that the hon. Gentleman is making, but what practical advantage does the new clause give for emergency access to prevent flooding?
Mr. Graham:
I am speaking about new clause 1. I ask the Minister to consider the points that I am raising on behalf of my constituents, to ensure that the local authority has meaningful powers so that it can spend money to do the job.
Mr. Bill Walker:
That is not what it is about.
Mr. Graham:
The hon. Gentleman said something from a sedentary position. If he stands up, I will give way.
Mr. Walker:
The hon. Gentleman should read what the amendment is about and what the powers are for. It is not about spending money.
Mr. Graham:
I could respond to that, but I have manners. The hon. Gentleman is just being provocative. That man should understand the suffering of my constituents.
I went on record and said that I welcomed the Bill. It is a step in the right direction. I welcome it in every way, and so do my constituents, my local authority and the people who are worried about the threat of flooding. I ask the Minister to go a stage further: give us rock solid assurances so that local government does not need constantly to look over its back, so that it can do the job properly. We are asking for strong emergency powers to deal with the problem. I hope that the Bill will help us in the long term. That is the message that I want the Minister to give my constituents.
I congratulate the Minister on introducing the only decent Bill that I have seen in the past 10 years.
Dr. Godman:
May I point out to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, that you are fortunate in one respect and I am unfortunate in another? My hon. Friend the Member for Renfrew, West and Inverclyde (Mr. Graham) is a neighbour of mine; you just come across him occasionally. [Laughter.] The hon. Member for North Tayside (Mr. Walker) may laugh, but he was being deliberately provocative when he intervened on my hon. Friend's passionate speech.
Talking about provocation, I wish to say mea culpa, that I was not being provocative when I asked my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, Leith (Mr. Chisholm) a question concerning a justice of the peace in the scheme of things. The JP approached by a local authority may in fact be an elected representative of that authority. My question was prompted by the fact that, most weekends, I meet up with a delightful woman in Scotland who is both a JP and a councillor. Far from criticising Edinburgh--if I can catch my hon. Friend's attention for a moment--I love that city. I lived for 14 years just off the new town.
The new clause is important. A local authority should have the power to take decisive action to defend our constituents where, say, a neighbour--be it a large
company or, perhaps, Clyde port authority--is acting irresponsibly. Many people complain about local authorities acting in a cumbersome, bureaucratic way, but in these circumstances, outlined so graphically--I would not say elegantly or even eloquently--by my hon. Friend the Member for Renfrew, West and Inverclyde, a local authority has to act promptly. I know of many councillors and local authority officials who would not dream of abusing the powers in the new clause, but decisive action may have to be taken occasionally to deal with some riparian owners, and I refer to Clyde port as a riparian owner.
I am grateful to the Minister for his letter dated 25 February, which was delivered almost by his own fair hand, in which he gave a substantive answer to a serious question that I asked him in Committee. As he said in his letter, he has sent copies to other members of the Committee. There is an important issue here, and with respect to what the Minister says in his letter, a local authority along the Clyde might need to take decisive action against a landowner. When I say "landowner", I am not talking about someone who owns an estate or a farm. We could be talking about an industrial enterprise such as Clyde port. I am not saying for one moment that Clyde port would neglect its obligations to the authorities and the people who live along the Clyde, as my hon. Friend the Member for Renfrew, West and Inverclyde and I do. Nevertheless, elected representatives and their officials should have the power to deal with negligent riparian owners or landowners who fail to honour their obligations to their neighbours.
The new clause would strengthen a Bill that will be welcomed by my constituents. Sometimes it is almost impossible to drive through Port Glasgow after heavy rain, as the Minister and the hon. Member for North Tayside know. In other areas in Greenock and Port Glasgow, the water runs heavily off the land. Perhaps Inverclyde council needs to take decisive action. Who can imagine someone like Bailie Tricia Godman behaving ultra vires, behaving badly, if the powers in the new clause were to hand?
We have to trust our local authorities and our much-maligned elected representatives. I know that every hon. Member would rather be a Member of this place than a member of a local council. Members of local councils have many onerous duties. They are much more amenable where their constituents are concerned. We are down here, 400 or 500 miles away from our constituents. Because of the damage that flooding inflicts on people's homes--on their carpets, furniture and so on--a local authority should have the right, through the new clause, to act decisively and expeditiously on behalf of the people in the community.
Mr. Bill Walker:
Like the hon. Gentleman, I too have had sad experience of flooding. I do not want the House to debate this matter without my placing it on record that I believe that the record of Harry Robertson and his emergency team in Perth and Kinross is exemplary. They have done a tremendous job, and will continue to do so. It is the officials and not the elected representatives who run the show when things go awry.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |