Increased Protection of the North Sea

Part of Orders of the Day — Environmental Protection Bill – in the House of Commons at 5:45 pm on 2 May 1990.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Simon Hughes Simon Hughes Opposition Deputy Chief Whip (Commons), Shadow Spokesperson (Education) 5:45, 2 May 1990

The hon. Member for Walthamstow (Mr. Summerson) is being very naive. That is the same argument as is used about Sellafield: that closing down Sellafield would cause wholesale unemployment among its large work force in Cumbria. The hon. Gentleman knows that it is quite within the capacity of ICI's research and development to deal with these issues and to solve the problems. If firms such as ICI are required to do so, they have the capacity. ICI is one of the most eminent private sector enterprises in the world and would be able and willing to solve the problems; it is a matter of Government will and requirement. Second, many people currently employed in ICI plants in the north-east could use their skills to bring about more environmentally acceptable processes of chemical production such as we discussed only on Monday of this week.

This is a very important point to make about environmental issues generally: there need be no unemployment as a result of environmental improvement. One obvious example is that all the energy that we use and waste and all the potential for conservation that we possess could be turned to reducing much harmful energy consumption and employing people to make sure that we conserve energy rather than waste it.