Proceeding contribution from Malcolm Moss (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 22 November 2005. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Contaminated Brownfield Sites.
Contaminated Brownfield Sites
: I am listening carefully to the Minister. Local authorities that are tasked under current legislation to look at site contamination accept that SGVs—if they are published; only half are—are to be used as guidelines and are not necessarily threshold levels. However, for gardens in which BAP is present, as it is in Littleport, there is a CLEA level of 1 mg per kg of soil and an earlier ICRCL recommendation of 50 mg per kg as an upper limit before any action needs to be taken. That is a huge difference and that is why confusion is arising. Someone associated with the Government—whether at the Health Protection Agency or the Environment Agency—should say that in that particular soil type, at a depth of up to 1 m, a particular concentration of BAP is not hazardous to health. I am sorry that this intervention is long, but this is important, Mr. Cummings. The Minister said that there is no acceptable level of BAP because it is carcinogenic. If it is present, it is a problem. However, the risk assessment for health needs to be made—
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 439 c364-5WH
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Brownfield sites Contamination Chemicals Environment Agency Pollution Property development Benzopyrene Littleport
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-05 23:31:29 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_278273
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_278273
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_278273