HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT BUILDINGS

HC Deb 09 March 1945 vol 408 cc2405-10

The Minister of Works (Mr. Duncan Sandys)

I beg to move, That a Supplementary sum, not exceeding £20,000, be granted to His Majesty, to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1945, for expenditure in respect of Houses of Parliament buildings. This Supplementary Estimate, which increases the nominal sum of £500 to £20,500, is intended to cover certain preparatory work which has been undertaken as a result of the Select Committee's Report on the House of Commons Rebuilding. The expenditure relates mainly to professional fees, certain experimental work, preparatory borings, and other tests. I think, however, the Committee would probably wish me to say a word or two about the procedure for consultation with hon. Members in regard to the rebuilding of the House. Before the recent Debate on the Select Committee's Report the Government felt that some arrangement should be made to ensure that if important suggestions of detail were made during the Debate they could be sifted and examined and, if appropriate, adopted as amendments to the plan. It was felt that matters of this kind, which are technical and detailed, could not be adequately dealt with during the Debate, or in the reply to that Debate. In consequence, my right hon Friend the Prime Minister proposed that the Select Committee should be reappointed after the Debate in order to consider any suggestions of detail, that is to say, suggestions which did not conflict with the main decision of the House.

Since then the Government in consultation through the usual channels and with hon. Members who were members of the Select Committee have been examining the suggestions which were made during that Debate. It seems that apart from certain speeches which raised wide issues and which clearly conflicted with the decision taken by the House—such as suggestions that the Gothic style should be abandoned—very few detailed amendments to the plan were suggested. The Government feel—and the Select Committee whom they have consulted on this point are in agreement—that we should not, in the circumstances, be justified in adopting the rather elaborate procedure of reconstituting the Select Committee for this purpose. We propose, however, subject to the views of the Committee, to consider a suggestion made during the Debate, namely, that at a later date a small panel of Members should be set up whom the Minister of Works could consult when necessary on matters connected with the rebuilding and refurnishing of the House. The selection of Members to serve on the panel could be decided by consultation through the usual channels, when the need arises. At the moment there is no work going on. It was felt that we should postpone any work on this project at any rate for a few months until the repair of bomb damage in London is more advanced. Therefore no immediate need arises. But as soon as it does the Government would, after consultation through the usual channels, suggest to the House the names of Members who might serve on the proposed panel.

Mr. De Chair (Norfolk, South Western)

I think it is a little unfortunate that this matter has come up to-day without much more notice being given of it, because I think I am the only member of the Select Committee who is present and I hesitate to express an opinion on behalf of any other members of that Committee. While I entirely agree that it would be undesirable to set up the Select Committee again, in view of the fact that no major amendments were brought up in the Debate, except completely different points of principle, I can see strong objections to the idea of a small panel of Members being appointed. I think most members of the Select Committee would feel that it would be unsatisfactory if a panel of the kind to which the Minister referred was selected from members of the Select Committee, because it would mean that you would get a small section of that Committee considering points of detail during the construction of the Chamber, which might not be representative of the views of the Committee as a whole.

Further, if the panel is to be selected from outside the Select Committee you will get a completely different set of views, being transmitted to the Minister, from those held by the Select Committee. I should have thought it far better, as we have a Minister of Works who is a Member of this House, and who is very accessible, for him to be the main channel between this House and the architect during the rebuilding of the new House of Commons. If Members have special ideas, such as the introduction of particular heraldic devices, or something to commemorate the Members of this House who have fallen during the war, those points could easily be put to the Minister, and he could put them to the architect. I am sure the House would have confidence in him in his discussions with the architect. I, for one, object to the suggestion that a new panel of Members should be set up to co-operate with the Minister during the rebuilding of the House.

Mr. Colegate

I would like to support what has been said by my hon. Friend the Member for South-Western Norfolk (Mr. De Chair). We had a Select Committee which carried out a certain task very well, and now it is agreed that it is likely that only minor points will arise. We all appreciate the free access we have to Ministers, including my right hon. Friend, and there seems to be no reason why anybody who has a point to raise on this matter should not make his views known to the Minister. It is really cumbersome to have to go to a panel of Members—

The Deputy-Chairman (Mr. Charles Williams)

I think I should warn the Committee that the question of this panel does not come under this Vote. The Minister has put it forward as a proposal, and the panel would have to be appointed by the House. I am in a difficulty in that I do not think we can have too long a discussion on the virtues of such a panel which, at present, is only a proposal to be dealt with on another occasion.

Mr. Colegate

I appreciate that, Mr. Williams, and I have practically finished what I wanted to say. I think it is a rather clumsy procedure for a Member of this House to have to go to another Member in order to make his views known, through him, to the Minister of Works on a point of detail. So I ask the Minister to consider whether he cannot rely on this free access of Members.

Mr. Martin (Southwark, Central)

In view of your Ruling, Mr. Williams, I do not want to discuss this matter at any length, but I want to put it to the Minister that there were a number of Members who were not fortunate in catching Mr. Speaker's eye in the Debate on the House of Commons Rebuilding, and who may have suggestions to put forward. As the building of the new House becomes more and more a reality there may be other Members who may have suggestions which they would like to make, and it is desirable that there should be some means by which we can put our views forward. I rather doubt whether a panel of Members would be most desirable, but in view of your Ruling, Mr. Williams, I do not want to pursue that point. It seems to me that the Minister will be an exceedingly busy Minister in the months immediately following the end of the war, and those of us who are particularly interested in rehousing in London and elsewhere desire that he should devote his time as completely as possible to that subject, and I would not like to suggest that he had any other problem, however small, put upon his shoulders. I hope he will consider providing some effective means by which hon. Members can make suggestions when the rebuilding of this Chamber takes place.

12.15 p.m.

Sir Stanley Reed (Aylesbury)

I know that I am treading upon thin ice, but perhaps I may be permitted to add two sentences. The idea has been put forward that Members should be able to approach the Minister individually with ideas as to alterations, but if representations came from a small collective body they would be regarded as more important. I hope the idea will not be summarily dismissed, because there is a very useful purpose behind it.

Mr. John Dugdale (West Bromwich)

I am a little perturbed by one sentence in the Minister's speech. He said there were very few suggestions on principle in connection with the details. It struck me as rather a curious phrase. Many hon. Members were, in fact, anxious to get a different kind of House and concentrated on that aspect, and as they have not been able to secure a different kind of House they may well have suggestions for the improvement of the House that is to be built. I hope the Minister will bear that in mind when reading the speeches in HANSARD and making up his mind whether there are likely to be any suggestions about details.

Mr. Sandys

I had not intended to open up a discussion on the question of the functions of the panel but I felt that it was incumbent upon me, as it was likely to be raised by hon. Members, to explain why the Government had not proceeded with their proposal to set up again the Select Committee. The question of the panel, as you, Mr. Williams, have rightly pointed out, can be raised and considered when the appropriate time comes. I would, however, like to say that there is no intention that this panel, if it is set up, should in any way debar any hon. Member from putting forward any proposal to the Minister concerned. In fact it was intended not so much as machinery for two-way traffic as for one-way traffic. It was thought that there should be a small body of interested Members who would be easily accessible to the Minister on such questions. In a matter of this kind, where it is a question of taste and opinion it is convenient for the Minister to be able to consult a small number of Members who are interested in the subject. That does not commit the House but it does give him some assistance in arriving at a decision. If a major change in the plan is involved, he must of course find other means of consulting the House as a whole. I do not think a panel would raise any difficulties and it would, I believe, be a help to the Minister of Works. To-day, however, I wished to confine myself to explaining why, after the Prime Minister had made that announcement in the House, a Motion for the reconstitution of the Select Committee had not been put forward. If the House wishes to discuss the question of the panel further opportunities will no doubt arise when the time comes. I tried to give notice to my right hon. Friend the Member for Horsham and Worthing (Earl Winterton) that I was going to mention this point but I believe the notice was rather short and that he was therefore not able to be present.

Mr. De Chair

Could the Minister say whether he was able to obtain the views for instance of the Noble Lord the Member for Horsham and Worthing (Earl Winterton) and any other hon. Members on the subject of the panel?

Mr. Sandys

I understood from the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury that most if not all the Members of the Select Committee had been consulted on this point, but if there is a difference of view about the panel there will be another opportunity given to the House to discuss it. I merely wished to make the explanation I have made in regard to the proposal to reconstitute the Select Committee.

Question put, and agreed to.