§ 70. Sir W. DAVISONasked the Minister of Transport whether, before agreeing to make a grant out of the Road Fund of 60 per cent. of the expenditure involved in pulling down Waterloo Bridge and erecting a new bridge to carry six lines of traffic in its place, he took into consideration that this work would take seven years to complete and that removing the old bridge would cost some £275,000; arid whether he will be prepared to make a similar grant. towards widening the existing bridge to take four lines of traffic, so as to save expenditure, reduce the time for the completion of the work, and in the opinion of the Royal Commission approximately double the present capacity of the bridge?
§ The MINISTER of TRANSPORT (Mr. Pybus)I do not know on what authority my hon. Friend states that it wilt taken seven years to complete a new bridge. In a report which has appeared this morning, the Improvements Committee of the London County Council state that the time required is about five years. In any case, however, the 1281 responsibility for formulating a satisfactory scheme rests with the London County Council, who will, I understand, consider on Tuesday next the report from their Improvements Committee on the subject. Pending their decision, I have nothing to add to my previous statement.
§ Sir W. DAVISONIs my hon. Friend aware that Waterloo Bridge is one of the greatest architectural masterpieces which we possess, and, in view of the saving both in time and money by the reconditioning of that bridge for four lines of traffic rather than the larger scheme proposed, does not my hon. Friend think that the Treasury, in the existing financial stringency, might offer to pay to the county council 60 per cent. of the cost of the smaller scheme when they have already offered to pay 60 per cent. of the larger scheme?
§ Mr. PYBUSI understand that my hon. Friend is asking me, in the event of the London County Council to-morrow refusing to adopt the resolution of their Improvements Committee, what I will do. That question is purely hypothetical.
§ Sir W. DAVISONDoes the Minister realise that it is being said that the Government's offer to pay 60 per cent. only applies to a bridge for six lines of traffic, and that, therefore, those who think that the reconditioning of the bridge for four lines of traffic is preferable would be out of court for a Government grant? Do I understand that it would be available if the London County Council approached the Government?
§ Sir W. DAVISONNo.
Captain CROOKSHANKMay I ask, when the Minister says that it rests with the London County Council to produce a satisfactory scheme, who is going to decide whether the scheme is satisfactory? Is it he?
§ Mr. PYBUSPresumably, the London County Council, having appointed a famous engineer and a famous architect, may be trusted, at any rate, to carry out the technical side of their work.
§ Major NATHANHave the Government entered into any commitment towards the London County Council in 1282 the event of the scheme mentioned in the question, for a six-line bridge, being adopted?
§ Mr. PYBUSI must refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer which I gave the other day on this question. In the event of the London County Council deciding that a six line bridge is necessary, involving the removal of the present Waterloo Bridge, then the Government would he prepared to give a grant of 60 per cent. from the Road Fund.
§ Major NATHANThen the answer to the question which I have frequently put is that His Majesty's Government have accepted a commitment of 60 per cent.?