HC Deb 07 November 1932 vol 270 cc30-1
68. Sir W. DAVISON

asked the Minister of Transport whether the Ministry of Transport will be prepared to pay the same percentage of the smaller cost involved in the reconditioning of Waterloo Bridge as they had agreed to pay in respect of the larger scheme, which was rejected by Parliament, for the pulling down and rebuilding of the bridge; and whether this has been communicated to the London County Council?

Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM

It would not be opportune for me to make any statement until the London County Council have had an opportunity of considering and discussing with the Minister the report of their consulting engineer, but my hon. Friend gave the House an undertaking in the course of the Debate on the London County Council Money Bill that there could be no question of giving financial aid to a scheme to which the House had declared itself opposed.

Sir W. DAVISON

But in view of the very unmistakeable opinion expressed by the House, that the present Waterloo Bridge should be reconditioned and not pulled down, surely the Ministry are prepared to inform the county council that they will give a similar percentage to the lower cost of reconditioning the bridge to that which they were prepared to give for pulling down and rebuilding the bridge?

Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM

I have said that we are perfectly willing and anxious to discuss the matter with the county council when the time arrives.

Sir W. DAVISON

Is that so, because the county council are discussing the matter on the basis that the Ministry have not offered to give the same facilities for a reconditioned bridge as for the pulling down and rebuilding of the bridge?

Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM

I cannot answer for what the county council are doing, of course.