HC Deb 22 March 1904 vol 132 cc451-4

[SECOND READING].

Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."

MR. LOUGH (Islington, W.)

said he hoped the House would have some explanation of the measure. It was before the House last year, and he had hoped that they had then made an end of it, but it had come up again. He understood that it dealt with the balance of the money in connection with the establishment of Battersea Park, and that there was a provision already in existence that the money should be applied for any general metropolitan purpose. By this Bill it was to be devoted entirely to the opening up of the new roadway to Charing Cross. This was a very questionable proposal. He protested against money which ought to be available for improvements in the poorer parts of London being used for the making of a road by which ground rents would be enhanced in the wealthiest part of the Metropolis. Unless there was a good case made out for it, the House ought to pause before passing the Bill.

MR. GIBSON BOWLES (Lynn Regis)

said it appeared to him that the proposal in the Bill complied with the necessary conditions with respect to the application of the money. If there was an improvement which could be made for the whole of London, it was the one which would open up The Mall to Charing Cross, and thereby add another great artery to the Metropolis. By the provision of this additional artery enormous relief would be given to the traffic in thoroughfares where at present it was often congested. At the same time he was not sure that it would not add to the congestion at Charing Cross, and it might have been better to bring out the new road south of the Admiralty. That proposal had not been accepted and certainly, as it stood, there was no improvement which had been made in the last fifty years that would be equal to this for the relief of taffic.

MR. WHITMORE (Chelsea)

said the proposed improvement would benefit every part of London, and all sections of the population. He would therefore give his cordial support to the Second Reading of the Bill.

MR. JOHN BURNS (Battersea)

said that Battersea Park was established sixty years ago out of money given to the parish by Parliament. There was an unexpended balance out of which it was now proposed to spend £15,000 or £18,000 in opening up. The Mall into Trafalgar Square. He believed the proposed application of the money complied with the conditions in regard to the balance of the fund being devoted to metropolitan improvements. The extension of The Mall from the Duke of York's Steps to Trafalgar Squire would give what would probably be one of the finest streets in the whole Metropolis. He agreed with the hon. Member for King's Lynn in thinking that it would give relief to the traffic in streets which were at present congested. Another advantage of the new avenue would be that the fire brigade from Scotland Yard would have much more rapid access to that part of London between the Palace and the Duke of York's Steps than was possible under present conditions.

SIR GEORGE BARTLEY (Islington, N.)

agreed with the hon. Member for Battersea that this was one of the greatest improvements made of late years. He was afraid that great pressure would be brought to bear in order that it might be used for all sorts of conveyances. It formed one side of a triangle, and an enormous amount of Traffic which at present passed along Victoria Street would be diverted to this road. He suggested that consideration should be given to the question of forming a shallow subway underneath the road which could be used for tramways and other conveyances. This was a pressing matter, for if the subway was not put in now, serious damage would be done to the trees, which were being planted should the work have to be done later. Subways of the kind he suggested had been made in Paris, Budapest, New York, and other places with great advantage in the way of facilitating traffic.

THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. VICTOR CAVENDISH,) Derbyshire, W.

said that the only objection that had been urged against the Bill was that from the hon. Member for West Islington, who said that the money ought to be distributed over London. He thought the Government were fully justified in taking the action they had taken in allowing the money to be applied in the way proposed. He hoped that, after the reception which the Bill had met with that afternoon, Parliament would be able to pass it within a very few days, in order to allow the work to be carried on immediately and with economy. He quite admitted that the question raised by the hon. Member for Islington was most important, but he was afraid the. Treasury would not be justified in asking Parliament to spend another very large sum on a work which had already cost so much.

MR. BROADHURST (Leicester)

said he understood that the money was invested in Consols. Was £18,000 the present value, or was it the value when the money was invested?

MR. VICTOR CAVENDISH

said he understood that it was the present value; and he believed it was estimated that that would be the amount required.

MR. HEYWOOD JOHNSTONE (Sussex, Horsham)

said that something should be done to divert from the principal streets, in daylight, unseemly traffic such as large vans containing dead meat, hides, soda bottles, and the like.

And, there being no further Business set down for the Afternoon Sitting, Mr. Speaker left the Chair until this Evening's Sitting.