| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Opencast Mining
5. Dr. Nick Palmer (Broxtowe): What the response has been to the new guidance on opencast mining from groups who submitted comments during the consultation phase. [82784]
The Minister for the Regions, Regeneration and Planning (Mr. Richard Caborn): The Council for the Protection of Rural England has written welcoming the new guidance. We have not as yet received any other responses since the guidance was published on 31 March.
Dr. Palmer: As my right hon. Friend will know, there are cynical people out there who tend to have doubts about consultation exercises. When he announced the consultation on mineral planning guidance note 3, a number of my constituents expressed doubts about whether that was genuinely meant. May I pass on the congratulations of many constituents? They were pleasantly surprised by the open-mindedness and creativeness of the Department in responding to their comments and in producing guidelines that are seen as balanced, fair and a good basis for the future.
Mr. Caborn: I thank my hon. Friend for those comments. It was an extremely good exercise, and I welcome the constructive comments on the guidance from Opposition Members who have problems with opencasting in their constituencies. I thank the House generally for the constructive approach to the consultation, which produced a welcome solution to the problem of opencasting. The fact that we arrived at a solution with the support of some Opposition Members is a credit to the House.
Single Regeneration Budget
6. Mr. Alan Johnson (Hull, West and Hessle): If he will make a statement on the single regeneration budget for Yorkshire and Humberside. [82785]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Mr. Alan Meale): The single regeneration budget--SRB--provides resources to support regeneration initiatives carried out by local partnerships. The SRB in Yorkshire and Humberside is now managed by the Yorkshire and the Humber regional development agency. It is considering 22 final bids for round 5, and will make recommendations to Ministers, who will take final decisions around the end of June this year.
Mr. Johnson: With respect to the competitiveness of businesses in the Yorkshire and Humber region, does my hon. Friend agree that the emphasis in SRB programmes needs to be placed on measures to improve learning in the work force, and on better links between businesses and the further and higher education sector?
Mr. Meale: My hon. Friend is right. The Government are committed to giving everyone the opportunity to have a stake in society through better education and training. We must all develop and sustain a regard for learning at any age.
Mr. David Curry (Skipton and Ripon): Will the Minister have regard to the importance of making sure
that the various funding flows--national and European--that contribute to regeneration are properly co-ordinated, integrated and prioritised? To that end, does he recognise the importance of the difficult circumstances in the rural uplands, particularly in North Yorkshire, and will he make sure that, when objective 2 designation for the rural strand is agreed, it will include all the areas currently under 5b? The situation in the hills is desperate, with a whole society in crisis.
Mr. Meale: The right hon. Gentleman is correct. In rounds 1 to 4, Yorkshire and Humberside got co-ordinated investment income of £242 million and an SRB direct contribution of £52 million. The new regional development agencies must pay due regard to the needs of rural areas.
Housing
7. Mr. Desmond Swayne (New Forest, West): What measures he is taking to encourage local authorities to transfer their housing stock to housing associations. [82786]
The Minister for London and Construction (Mr. Nick Raynsford): Our guidance on local authority housing strategies makes it clear that housing transfer is one of the options that an authority should consider when developing its strategy. However, we would not seek to encourage authorities to pursue transfer where it appears inappropriate or where a majority of tenants oppose it.
Mr. Swayne: As a result of the changes that the Government introduced to the scheme last year, New Forest council will have to pay out £7 million for disposing of its stock--£7 million that would otherwise have been available to improve the life of tenants in the New Forest area. Can the Minister justify that? Will he undertake to review the 8 per cent. charged by his Department, as that is no longer consistent with market rates?
Mr. Raynsford: This year, we have the largest programme ever of authorities seeking transfer, so the financial circumstances are not such as to put them off. The hon. Gentleman is a little out of date. Is he not aware that we have already announced that we are reducing the 8 per cent. discount rate to 7 per cent?
Mr. Peter L. Pike (Burnley): Is it not right to emphasise the point made by my hon. Friend the Minister that all housing stock transfers must receive the approval of the tenants concerned? Is it not important to remember that, in some cases, it will enable local authorities to tackle both their private sector and their public sector problems better if such approval is given? In councils such as Burnley, with low-value properties, there will be a residual debt problem, through no fault of the authority. Has that yet been overcome?
Mr. Raynsford: My hon. Friend makes an extremely valid point about the importance of keeping tenants closely involved and securing their support for any proposal for transfer. What a contrast with the previous Government, who introduced a botched and rigged voting system for their infamous tenants' choice scheme. It was
designed to imply that anyone who did not vote was in favour. That sort of gerrymandering has no place in this Government's approach.
I say to my hon. Friend that we are looking closely at the issue of overhanging debt, which we recognise is important. We are conscious of it and are seeking to make progress in ways that will help authorities such as his.
Mr. Nigel Waterson (Eastbourne):
Will the Minister confirm that the Government have recently approved the transfer of no fewer than 130,000 homes? Given his acceptance in an earlier answer that that is a record for large-scale voluntary transfers, will he also confirm that, as long as the Government are still casting around for their own distinctive housing policy, they will continue to apply proven Conservative housing policies such as LSVT?
Mr. Raynsford:
I will do no such thing, but I will confirm that the Government are pursuing housing policies that are designed to respond to the needs of the country and to the aspirations of tenants. I have referred to the very real difference between our attitude and that of the hon. Gentleman's party, which took tenants for granted and tried to impose voting systems that were an absolute caricature of tenant consultation. We are determined to ensure that housing needs are met through the release of additional resources, to which my right hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government and Housing has already referred, through the comprehensive spending review.
Dr. Brian Iddon (Bolton, South-East):
Does my hon. Friend agree that, under the previous Administration, stock transfers from councils to housing associations were not always in the best long-term interests of the tenants? They drove rents even higher than they drove up council rents; they did not foster tenant involvement in the housing association sector, which they did in the council sector; and they paid no attention to management costs, from the chief executive's salary downwards. Will he assure the House that this Government will take heed of those matters?
Mr. Raynsford:
My hon. Friend makes an extremely fair point and highlights the extent to which the previous Government drove rents upwards in a way that led to extreme poverty for many tenants and increased the poverty trap. That is why this Government are pursuing a policy to ensure that there is moderation in rent increases for social housing and are seeking to ensure that tenants have genuine choice when they choose their appropriate future home. That is a principle on which the Government will continue to operate.
8. Mr. Peter Luff (Mid-Worcestershire):
What plans he has for the funding for rural bypasses in 2000-01. [82787]
The Minister of Transport (Dr. John Reid):
Construction is due to begin on five rural bypass schemes in our targeted programme of improvements in 2000-01.
Mr. Luff:
The Minister can no longer take decisions on bypasses in Scotland, although he represents a Scottish
Dr. Reid:
I am delighted that I was able to announce 15 bypasses within two days of having the honour of becoming a Minister at the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions--three times more than the Conservative Government announced in the previous three or four years. The hon. Gentleman referred to the Wyre Piddle bypass. I am aware of the tragic accident of 28 April, which the police are investigating, and, as he will know, his own county council may submit an application under its local transport plan, which is due in July.
Mr. Bob Blizzard (Waveney):
Will my right hon. Friend confirm that, where there was no alternative, the Government would support the building of bypasses for small rural market towns? One such case is Bungay in my constituency, where, every day, many trucks from Bernard Matthews--a major East Anglian employer--simply have to squeeze their way through the ancient and narrow streets of Bungay because there is no alternative route to the processing factory 10 miles to the south. Would it not be a major improvement for the environment of Bungay if a bypass were built?
Dr. Reid:
I congratulate my hon. Friend on his clever question. He will understand if I agree only with the general proposition; that, where there is no alternative, we will look at the creation of bypasses. That is why we have created more than the previous Government. I am pleased to say that five of the seven schemes in our targeted programme of improvements to start in 2000-01 are rural bypasses. I shall restrain myself from commenting on the specific merits of Bungay and associated roads in the area.
Mrs. Eleanor Laing (Epping Forest):
Is the Minister aware of the enormous damage that is being done to the environment--particularly the ancient trees of Epping Forest--as a result of the amount of traffic that is passing through the forest because of the cancellation of the planned north-facing slip roads at junction 5 of the M11, which would have created, effectively, the Epping bypass? Given the new evidence of the vast environmental damage being done to those protected trees, which have been there for more than 150 years, will the Minister reconsider his decision not to build the north-facing slip roads, and build them?
Dr. Reid:
I am always grateful for all information given to me by the hon. Lady on arboriculture. She would not expect me--however convincing her one-minute question might have been--suddenly to announce a change to the complete roads programme of Britain.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |