HC Deb 07 July 1947 vol 439 cc1935-8
Mr. Thornton-Kemsley

I beg to move, in page 43, line 26, at the end to insert: and where any such building is acquired under this Subsection the local planning authority shall not execute, or cause or permit to be executed, any works for the demolition of the building or for its alteration or extension which would substantially affect its character. The purpose of this Amendment can be briefly stated. We gave some attention to this matter in Committee and the Joint Under-Secretary said he would consider it. It is in order to elicit from him the result of his deliberations that we have put down the Amendment. Subsection (4) deals with cases of buildings which have been taken over by local authorities but which are not the subject of building preservation orders. If they were the subject of such orders, these ancient and beautiful buildings would have to be preserved, but since they are not the subject of orders we think it is important that the local authority should be under some compulsion to maintain them in good order.

Colonel J. R. H. Hutchison

I beg to second the Amendment.

I understand that in another place a solution has been found to this matter. That solution might be acceptable to the Government and also to hon. Members on this side of the House.

The Lord Advocate

We have looked at this carefully and we think the present words should stand. The Amendment would mean that a local planning authority would have to preserve buildings for all time and would never be able to alter them even though it might be necessary in the interest of public health. In point of fact, it would impose on a local planning authority even more onerous conditions than exist in the case of a building in respect of which a building preservation order had been made.

Amendment negatived.

Commander Galbraith

I beg to move, in page 43, line 26, at the end, to insert: (5) An authorisation may be given under this section notwithstanding that a clearance order or a demolition order has been made under Section sixteen of the Housing (Scotland) Act, 1930. As hon. Members no doubt realise, this Clause gives to local authorities the power to acquire by agreement land which contains any building in respect of which a building preservation order is in force. This Amendment carries the matter a little further. It empowers the local authority to acquire buildings which may be in the area of a clearance or demolition order, but which are of historical interest and in respect of which no building preservation order is in force. It is of value that we should keep as many of these old buildings as we can.

Colonel J. R. H. Hutchison

I beg to second the Amendment.

The Lord Advocate

The powers given by this Clause can be used only when a building preservation order is already in force. In my view, the Amendment would not alter that position. It is really most improbable that a local planning authority would ever make a building preservation order in respect of a building upon which a demolition order had already been made. There is no method under the existing law, so far as I can see, under which the demolition order, once made, can be rescinded. It is equally unlikely that a local authority would make a demolition order for a building in respect of which a preservation order had been made. I can see what hon. Members opposite want here, but I still think they need have no real anxiety but that the matter may be left to us.

Mr. J. S. C. Reid

I do not want to press the matter, but it is not at all difficult, to my mind, to think of cases where a building, as a shell, ought to be preserved historically as a monument, but the inside of which is such that a demolition order is required. It may very well be that we may get the demolition order first when we ought to have had a preservation order, and if, as the Lord Advocate tells us, there is no way of rescinding the demolition order, the position is even worse than we had anticipated. I should have thought that he would take this opportunity of putting into the Bill some method of undoing a demolition order so as to preserve the outside of a building which might very easily be the subject of a demolition order if one took account only of the inside. I hope the Lord Advocate will look at this matter again, as mistakes are bound to happen sometimes, and it seems to me that we may get to the point where a demolition order has been made in respect of something which ought to be preserved, and that there is no way out of that position. This point having been raised, the Government should find a way out, and, as the Bill is the proper place for providing that way out, we think it ought to be inserted before this Bill becomes law. I hope he will be able to do this, because it is in everybody's interest that it should be done.

Mr. McKie

I very much hope that the Lord Advocate will take to heart what my right hon. and learned Friend has said, because Scotland is very rich in buildings of historical interest, and I share the apprehensions which have been expressed, as representing a constituency which is particularly rich in historical monuments. Although they have been fairly amply safeguarded by the Preservation of Ancient Monuments Act, we all know what has happened in the past, in all the countries of Europe, where demolition has taken place for the purely utilitarian purposes which my right hon. and learned Friend envisaged. I hope the Lord Advocate will do something about it, because, as a true lover of Scotland, I should expect him to share our concern in this matter. In putting forward this Amendment, we desire only to prevent the undue spoliation of buildings of historical value in Scotland, and I therefore ask the Lord Advocate seriously to reconsider the matter

The Lord Advocate

I would suggest that the circumstances which have been suggested occur very seldom, but we will certainly look at the matter again and see what we can do.

Mr. Scollan

I am sorry the Lord Advocate said he would look into this matter again, because I do not think it requires reconsideration. If there is any building of historical interest within the boundary of the local planing authority, nobody can visualise that body acting in a manner likely to bring about the destruction of that building. In cases where there are very old buildings of historical interest, the local authority, in consultation with the Secretary of State, will decide that the building is a monument worthy of preservation. If the local authority does not agree, I do not see why the Bill should compel them to preserve something, if they do not wish to do so.

Sir W. Darling

I have listened to what the hon. Member for West Renfrew (Mr. Scollan) has said, and I should like to refer to an ancient building known as Gladstone's Land in the City of Edinburgh. It was designated by the local authority for demolition to make way for the construction of some of the modern buildings which the hon. Member for West Renfrew has in mind. This decision by the local authority caused a public outcry, and if my memory is right, I think I am right in saying that the Ancient Monuments Commission undertook to find half the money if the public would find the other half. As a result, this ancient and characteristic building which is known as Gladstone's Land still exists in the City of Edinburgh, and is still owned and is occupied by the Saltoun Society, one of those public-spirited cultural societies which have done so much for Scotland. I am saying this to refresh the memory of the Lord Advocate. It is not an unimportant matter that a great many such buildings will be rather ruthlessly demolished with a great loss to the community if an Amendment of this sort does not get the support of the Lord Advocate. I am sure the Lord Advocate would be the last man in the world to want these characteristic buildings demolished and replaced by something of less historical value.

Amendment negatived.