Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page

Lord Jenkin of Roding: My Lords, when I heard the dreaded words "future legislative opportunity" my heart

9 Mar 1995 : Column 453

sank. I cannot think why Parliament should have to wait for future legislative opportunity to do something for which such widespread support has been expressed in the House. I shall not repeat my arguments, particularly those about the second and third amendments, except to say to my noble friend Lord Burnham that tar boilers are within the definition of subsection (2) of Amendment No. 226 which refers to smoke, fumes or gases emitted from machinery or equipment in the street.

The noble Lord, Lord Mishcon, and my noble friend Lord Onslow have a good point. Anyone wishing to look at this legislation, as I hope they will in another place, will recognise the wisdom of going down that road so far as there is an external appeal.

I was grateful to have the support of noble Lords, and in particular that of my noble friend Lord Brabazon of Tara, because I am aware of the interests that he is so eloquent in supporting and defending in the House. To have his support for this group of amendments is valuable. We should not wait for a "future legislative opportunity". It would greatly encourage the Government and their officials to produce suitable legislation in another place if we had put these amendments into the Bill. I think that I want to test the opinion of the House.

6.20 p.m.

On Question, Whether the said amendment (No.225) shall be agreed to?

Their Lordships divided: Contents, 56; Not-Contents, 89.

Division No. 1


Acton, L.
Airedale, L.
Archer of Sandwell, L.
Bancroft, L.
Beaumont of Whitley, L.
Blackstone, B.
Boyd-Carpenter, L.
Carnock, L.
Chorley, L.
Clinton-Davis, L.
Cocks of Hartcliffe, L.
Craigavon, V.
Darcy (de Knayth), B.
Dormand of Easington, L.
Dubs, L.
Elis-Thomas, L.
Gainsborough, E.
Gladwin of Clee, L.
Glenamara, L.
Graham of Edmonton, L. [Teller.]
Hamwee, B.
Harris of Greenwich, L.
Harrowby, E.
Henderson of Brompton, L.
Hertford, M.
Hilton of Eggardon, B.
Jeger, B.
Jenkin of Roding, L. [Teller.]
Jenkins of Hillhead, L.
Jenkins of Putney, L.
Kennet, L.
Kilbracken, L.
Kilmarnock, L.
Lawrence, L.
Lovell-Davis, L.
Lytton, E.
McNair, L.
Meston, L.
Mishcon, L.
Monkswell, L.
Moran, L.
Nelson, E.
Nicol, B.
Onslow, E.
Peyton of Yeovil, L.
Redesdale, L.
Rodgers of Quarry Bank, L.
Shannon, E.
Strabolgi, L.
Strathcona and Mount Royal, L.
Tordoff, L.
Walpole, L.
Wharton, B.
Williams of Crosby, B.
Williams of Elvel, L.
Young of Dartington, L.


Abinger, L.
Addison, V.
Astor of Hever, L.
Astor, V.
Birdwood, L.
Blaker, L.
Blatch, B.
Blyth, L.
Braine of Wheatley, L.
Brigstocke, B.
Brougham and Vaux, L.
Butterworth, L.
Campbell of Croy, L.
Carnegy of Lour, B.
Chalker of Wallasey, B.
Chesham, L.
Clanwilliam, E.
Clark of Kempston, L.
Constantine of Stanmore, L.
Cork and Orrery, E.
Courtown, E.
Cranborne, V. [Lord Privy Seal.]
Cross, V.
Cumberlege, B.
Denton of Wakefield, B.
Donegall, M.
Dudley, E.
Eden of Winton, L.
Elles, B.
Erroll, E.
Flather, B.
Fraser of Carmyllie, L.
Goschen, V.
Greenway, L.
Halsbury, E.
Hayhoe, L.
Henley, L.
HolmPatrick, L.
Hooper, B.
Howe, E.
Hylton-Foster, B.
Inglewood, L. [Teller.]
Kingsland, L.
Lane of Horsell, L.
Leigh, L.
Lindsay, E.
Lindsey and Abingdon, E.
Long, V.
Lucas, L.
Lyell, L.
Mackay of Ardbrecknish, L.
Mackay of Clashfern, L. [Lord Chancellor.]
Mancroft, L.
Marlesford, L.
McColl of Dulwich, L.
Mersey, V.
Miller of Hendon, B.
Monk Bretton, L.
Monteagle of Brandon, L.
Mottistone, L.
Moyne, L.
Munster, E.
Murton of Lindisfarne, L.
Northesk, E.
Orkney, E.
Orr-Ewing, L.
Pearson of Rannoch, L.
Renwick, L.
Rodger of Earlsferry, L.
Saltoun of Abernethy, Ly.
Sharples, B.
Shaw of Northstead, L.
Shuttleworth, L.
Skelmersdale, L.
Skidelsky, L.
St. Davids, V.
Stewartby, L.
Stockton, E.
Strathcarron, L.
Strathclyde, L. [Teller.]
Suffield, L.
Thomas of Gwydir, L.
Trumpington, B.
Ullswater, V.
Wade of Chorlton, L.
Weatherill, L.
Willoughby de Broke, L.
Wise, L.
Wynford, L.

Resolved in the negative, and amendment disagreed to accordingly.

9 Mar 1995 : Column 454

[Amendments Nos. 226 and 227 not moved.]

6.28 p.m.

Clause 75 [National waste strategy]:

Lord Elis-Thomas moved Amendment No. 228:

Page 78, line 28, at end insert ("and
(iv) suitable disposal sites or installations.").

The noble Lord said: My Lords, the purpose of the amendment, which was suggested to me by Earth Rights, the environmental law and resources centre, is to comply with EC directive 75/442, as amended, so as to ensure that suitable disposal sites or installations are mentioned specifically, and included within the national waste strategy. We have now had the benefit of seeing the Government's draft of their waste management plan on the import and export of waste. This is a DoE, Welsh Office, Scottish Office, and DoE (Northern Ireland) joint document. Paragraph 11 states:

    "It is the Government's aim to facilitate and enhance a network of disposal and recovery facilities within the United Kingdom through its National Waste Strategy".

Therefore, it is surprising that there is no reference in the Bill to the issue of sites.

The new EPA Section 44A, which arises at Clause 75, provides for that national waste strategy for England and Wales. However, that strategy contains the

9 Mar 1995 : Column 455

Government's policy on waste recovery and disposal as required by the EC directive to which I referred. That strategy is to be drawn up by the Secretary of State; it is not a strategy which is to be considered by this House.

One of the essential requirements of the directive has, in my view and in the view of Earth Rights, not being included. Article 7 of the directive requires four particular matters to be included within the strategy and in waste management plans. The first is the type, quantity and origin of the waste to be recovered or disposed. The second is the technical requirements that generally apply. The third is any special arrangements for particular wastes and the fourth is suitable disposal sites or installations. The section requires only the first three of those matters to be included within the strategy. Therefore, the requirement relating to suitable disposable sites has not been included. I beg to move.

Viscount Ullswater: My Lords, Amendment No. 228 would require the national waste strategy for England and Wales to include provisions relating to suitable disposal sites and installations.

The amendment is well intended. It aims to ensure that we meet fully the requirements of the amended EC framework directive on waste, Article 7 of which does indeed require waste management plans to relate to suitable disposal sites or installations. However, the omission of this requirement from the list of provisions which the national waste strategy must cover is deliberate, and reflects the existing arrangements for implementing Article 7 of this directive, which will be partly superseded by the provisions of Clause 75.

At present, Article 7 is implemented jointly by waste disposal plans drawn up by waste regulation authorities under Section 50 of the Environmental Protection Act, and by development plans drawn up by local planning authorities. The precise arrangements for implementing the directive are contained in Schedule 4 to the Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994. Paragraph 7 specifically requires the waste policies in development plans to include policies in respect of suitable disposal sites or installations. That is because the siting—and criteria for siting—new waste facilities is a matter for the planning rather than the waste regulation authority.

In drawing up the waste strategy provisions, we have been careful to retain this distinction and the waste strategy accordingly must relate to type, quantity and origin of waste, general technical requirements and special arrangements for particular waste. But it is not required to relate to suitable disposal sites or installations, which rightly remain the responsibility of local planning authorities and for which the latter will continue to be required to make provision in their development plans.

I should add that neither the strategy nor development plans need be confined to the matters set out in the directive and I have no doubt that there are other matters which the Secretary of State will wish to include in his strategy, including information about existing facilities which will be obtained through the national waste survey. However, we believe it important to maintain

9 Mar 1995 : Column 456

the distinction between the role of the planning authority and the role of the Secretary of State in determining the location of new facilities.

I hope that, with this explanation, the noble Lord will feel able to withdraw the amendment.

Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page