| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Miss McIntosh: I am grateful for the Minister's generosity in giving way. There has been a clear abuse of compulsory powers. Initially, by offering an easement as opposed to a wayleave, the National Grid was offering a capital payment to reflect the depreciation in the value of the property. To those who did not take up the offer at the time, the National Grid has behaved shoddily. I hoped that the Minister would address the issue this evening.
Mr. Raynsford: As I have already explained to the hon. Lady, that is specifically a matter for my colleague, the Minister for Small Firms, Trade and Industry. As it is not my responsibility, I am not in a position to respond on the actions of the National Grid in relation to an electricity wayleave.
I know that a number of landowners who are the subject of compulsory wayleaves have argued that the wayleave grants the company only very limited access to their land, more or less along the route of the proposed line. That is a clear difference from compulsory purchase of a property for development, where the property is acquired to be disposed of. The arrangement necessitates a different regime from that which would apply in the case of compulsory acquisition.
A wayleave granted by the Secretary of State gives access rights for the purpose of installing and keeping installed the line, and for purposes relating to its maintenance. The access rights do not define particular parts of a plot of land to which access is granted. The wayleave identifies only the land at issue.
It is therefore necessary to look at the purpose of the wayleave so that access to sufficient land is allowed for installation and maintenance purposes. Obviously, that will involve a particular strip underneath the line, but it will also involve access to other parts of the land--for example, access from an entrance to the land to the strip underneath the line.
Although the wayleave identifies the line and the land in question, the detailed implementation of these rights--for example, agreeing working areas and access routes--is a matter for discussion and agreement between the landowner and the company. Obviously, given the different circumstances in different areas, there have to be agreements between the parties to ensure the minimum disruption and the most satisfactory arrangement to avoid causing inconvenience to the landowner.
Miss McIntosh:
I think that the Minister, so far as he has responsibility, will accept that this is the crux of the debate. First, there has been an announcement--by either North Yorkshire county council or Hambleton district council--that the Queen's highways may not be used to access the land. The farmers' land will be used in the construction stage in a way that had never been imagined possible before. That has caused difficulties for the parties concerned reaching an agreement.
Secondly, family businesses are involved. The farmers are concerned that National Grid is unable to say exactly when it is coming in and exactly to what amount of land it wants access. Farmers in North Yorkshire, particularly cereal growers and beef producers, have gone through a record crisis and they need a degree of certainty in planning.
Mr. Raynsford:
My understanding is that the company is currently attempting to negotiate on access routes and lines with the landowners. Clearly, if there are problems arising from those negotiations and the hon. Lady believes that this matter is being handled unsatisfactorily by the statutory undertaker, she should certainly take that up with my colleagues at the Department of Trade and Industry.
I am told that consent was refused for two short stretches of line--at Nunthorpe and near Newby--and so it fell to the company to consider placing those two
stretches underground. I gather that it is the company's intention to route underground not only those two stretches, but the stretch of line between them.
The Secretary of State's powers to grant consent for electricity lines do not cover underground cables; accordingly, the company does not need to obtain consent. However, it must ensure that appropriate arrangements are made for access to allow construction and maintenance of the cable. I understand that the company is currently trying to negotiate voluntary agreements with the affected landowners. However, if voluntary agreements cannot be reached, the company may either apply for compulsory wayleaves or for the confirmation of compulsory purchase orders in respect of the access requirements.
According to the information available to me, the DTI has not received any applications for the confirmation of compulsory purchase orders. However, if any are received, the statutory procedures allow interested parties to make their case to a person appointed by the Secretary of State. Only after receiving the report of the appointed person will the Secretary of State express any view on any such applications.
I am conscious that I have not answered every last point relating to consents under the 1989 Act, but I have no doubt that my colleagues at the DTI would be happy to advise the hon. Lady further, should she wish to contact them.
Question put and agreed to.
Adjourned accordingly at eight minutes past Nine o'clock.
| Index | Home Page |