§ 16. Mr. MOLSONasked the Minister of Agriculture whether the Commissioners of Crown Lands authorised Sir Reginald Blomfield to present a report to the Royal Fine Art Commission explaining the policy of the Crown with regard to the rebuilding of Carlton House Terrace; whether he will state what that policy is; and whether they have in any way approved the plans published by Sir Reginald Blomfield?
§ Major ELLIOTThe answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. The policy of the Commissioners of Crown Lands is, shortly, to review at an early date the position of Carlton House Terrace, having regard to the increasing difficulty of obtaining tenants for the dwelling-houses therein, and to the responsibility of the Commissioners as trustees to neglect no reasonable opportunity of securing the best possible financial return upon any property entrusted to them. The answer to the last part of the question is in the negative.
§ Mr. MOLSONIf it is the intention of the Government to review the whole position, how is it that Sir Reginald Blomfield is able to explain their policy to the Fine Art Commission?
§ Major ELLIOTIt is difficult to discuss this matter by question and answer, but I think that it will not be found that Sir Reginald Blomfield went beyond what I have said in this answer.
§ Mr. MAXTONMay we take it that the Minister will not agree to the expenditure or the loss of any public money to maintain this decaying neighbourhood?
§ Sir ARTHUR MICHAEL SAMUELAs the right hon. and gallant Gentleman mentions reviewing the buildings there, will he state the approximate date upon which it was decided to grant the lease to Messrs. Pinchin Johnson?
§ Major ELLIOTThe lease to Messrs. Pinchin Johnson is not in Carlton House Terrace. An agreement was entered into in July to grant a lease.
§ Sir A. M. SAMUELWas not that at a time when the Minister was not in England
§ Major ELLIOTNo, the Minister came to this decision after discussion before he left for Ottawa.
§ 17. Sir WILLIAM DAVISONasked the Minister of Agriculture whether Sir Reginald Blomfield's design for the rebuilding of Carlton House Terrace has received the approval of the Commissioners of Crown Lands; whether this or any other design for a comprehensive rebuilding of Carlton House Terrace and Carlton Gardens was considered and approved by the Commissioners prior to the letting of the site of 4, Carlton Gardens for business premises; what is the term of the proposed lease of this site: and whether it is the intention of the Commissioners to rebuild the houses in Carlton House Terrace and Carlton Gardens as the leases fall in during the next 50 years without waiting till the property can be dealt with as a whole?
§ Major ELLIOTThe answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. A sketch of Sir Reginald Blomfield's design for the rebuilding of Carlton House Terrace was submitted for the consideration of the Commissioners of Crown Lands and of the Royal Fine Art Commission for the sole purpose of showing how the design for 4, Carlton Gardens could hereafter be applied to the rebuilding of the terrace. The new lease of 4, Carlton Gardens is for a term of 99 years from 10th October, 1932. With regard to the last part of the question, the Commissioners will have to be guided by future circumstances as they develop.
§ Sir W. DAVISONIs the House to understand that the Commissioners have tied themselves up for a period of 99 years before they have come to a decision as to the final development of the property?
§ Major ELLIOTIt is true that the lease granted for Number 4 is for a period of 99 years, but it is also true that no final conclusions have been come to with regard to Carlton House Terrace itself. In so far as this answers my hon. Friend's question, it must be taken as the position.
§ Mr. MORGAN JONESIs there any reason why this part of London should be immune from reconstruction?
§ Major ELLIOTIt has become obviously quite necessary.
§ Mr. GODFREY NICHOLSONIs there any reason why the Commissioners of Crown Lands should regard themselves as bound to pay more attention to the financial side than to the aesthetic side of the question of this property?
§ Major ELLIOTI am afraid that they must eventually take full consideration of the financial aspect of the trusts which have been handed over to them, not for the purpose of satisfying their own desires, but for the purpose of obtaining the utmost possible revenue for the nation.
§ Sir W. DAVISONSurely the financial and aesthetic sides of a property such as this are very closely allied?
§ Major ELLIOTYes, I am sure that that is so, but we cannot be blind, to the financial side of the transaction either.
§ 21. Sir ARTHUR STEEL-MAITLANDasked the Minister of Agriculture whether he has approached Messrs. Pinchin Johnson with a view to further work on the site of No. 4, Carlton Gardens being suspended until the whole question of Carlton Gardens and Carlton House Terrace has been reconsidered; and, if not, whether he will so approach them without delay?
§ Major ELLIOTThe Commissioners of Crown Lands have communicated with Messrs. Pinchin Johnson and Company, Limited, who state that in view of the urgent necessity of completing the building without delay for essential business purposes they greatly regret that they are unable to entertain this suggestion.
§ Sir A. STEEL-MAITLANDHas the right hon. and gallant Gentleman used all his influence to enable this part of London to be dealt with comprehensively, instead of having one part built on without any plans being approved for the rest?
§ Major ELLIOTYes, Sir, I think I have used all the influence in my power, but, after all, this is a case in which there is a building agreement in existence and building is actually going on.
§ Sir W. DAVISONCan my right hon. and gallant Friend offer, as he probably ought to offer, some consideration or in- 727 ducement to Messrs. Pinchin Johnson, and has he drawn their attention to the strong feeling aroused on the matter?
§ Mr. MOLSONAre we to understand that now the right hon. and gallant Gentleman is willing to try to prevent that building from being erected at 4, Carlton Gardens, before a general policy has been adopted?
§ Major ELLIOTNo, Sir, I think it would be inaccurate to say that. In view of the feeling in the House and the number of questions on the subject, I approached the firm in question to see whether they were willing to suspend operations there, but the firm have replied, as I have informed the House, that they are not able to do so.
§ Mr. MAXTONWhy cannot the Minister—
§ Mr. SPEAKERWe have had a number of questions on this subject already.
§ Mr. MAXTONFrom one side. I want to ask the Minister why he cannot give a definite negative to this preposterous agitation?
14. Marquess of HARTINGTONasked the Minister of Agriculture how many applications have been received since the beginning of 1932 by the Commissioners of Crown Lands from lessees in Carlton Gardens and Carlton House Terrace for release from their leases?
§ Major ELLIOTThe Commissioners of Crown Lands have received since the beginning of 1932 applications from the lessees of six houses in Carlton Gardens and Carlton House Terrace for release from their leases.
§ Major ELLIOTThere were two applications in addition, but that was before this period.
15. Marquess of HARTINGTONasked the Minister of Agriculture what amount of rent was received by the Commissioners of Crown Lands for Carlton House Terrace and Carlton Gardens in 1931; and what applications for office premises, flats, or hotels on this site at higher rentals have been received?
§ Major ELLIOTThe total rent received by the Commissioners of Crown Lands for Carlton House Terrace and Carlton Gardens in the year ended 31st March, 1932, amounted to £32,084 9s. Since the beginning of November, 1930, nine applications for office premises, flats or hotels have been received but in no case except that of No. 4, Carlton Gardens did the negotiations proceed far enough for the question of rent to be discussed.