§ 34 and 35. Mr. K. Robinsonasked the Minister of Housing and Local Government (1) what steps he will now take to save the St. James's Theatre from destruction in view of the decision of the London County Council to grant planning permission for development of the site;
(2) if he will institute a public inquiry into the proposal to develop the site of the St. James's Theatre for office accommodation.
§ Mr. H. BrookePermission in principle to build offices on this site was given by the London County Council in 1954, and a permission in detail was given by them last month for a similar purpose. The revocation of either of these permissions would be likely to involve the council in the payment of a large sum in compensation, and they are not prepared to take such a step. These being the facts, I do not consider I should be justified in intervening.
§ Mr. RobinsonHas not the Minister got power under Section 100 of the Town and Country Planning Act to make an order revoking the planning permission? Does his refusal to do so mean that he is totally unconcerned about the loss of one of the last two Georgian theatres in London?
§ Mr. BrookeNo, I am not at all unconcerned. To use the phrase of my predecessor, this is a matter which slipped through the net; but, having given it my most careful consideration, I am bound to agree with the London County Council that it would not be right to revoke the permission that has already been given, bearing in mind that that would cast a very heavy financial burden on public funds.
§ Mr. SnowWill the Minister have yet another look at this? While one does not want in any way to reduce the powers of the London County Council—[HON. MEMBERS: "Why not?"]—surely he does not want the whole parish of St. James's to suffer the same fate as Berkeley Square? Already some wretched American film company has put up a most disgraceful building in St. James's Street, and the whole process is continuing.
§ Mr. BrookeI cannot discuss the whole policy of the London County Council 879 planning authority on this Question. The fact is that there would be no possibility of demolishing the theatre if the theatrical interests which own it did not take some action about selling it. The London County Council used its best endeavours in considering what should be done in the circumstances and took the view, which I share, that inasmuch as planning permission was given three years ago, it would not be right to call upon the taxpayers and the ratepayers to make a very heavy contribution for the revocation of that permission.
§ Mr. H. MorrisonWhile not questioning the right of my hon. Friends to raise this matter in the House within the rules of order, may I ask whether the Minister will recognise that the London County Council is likely, as a great London authority, to keep in mind the true interests of London, artistically and otherwise? Is it not better that it should decide these matters if possible, rather than that the Minister should jump in and reverse the decision of the elected local authority? Has the L.C.C. not got to keep in mind the material consideration of the heavy compensation in which the ratepayers would be involved?
§ Mr. BrookeI think there is entire agreement between the London County Council and myself on the future policy of these planning applications concerning London theatres. In this case, I have indicated that I agree with the action which, in the circumstances, the London County Council has at this moment felt it necessary to take about the St. James's Theatre.
§ Mr. StokesSo that those of us who are not in this secret may have a better understanding, will the right hon. Gentleman tell us what sum will be involved if he were to reverse the decision? He says that the ratepayers would have to pay a lot of money. How much?
§ Mr. BrookeNeither I nor anybody else could make an absolutely exact estimate, but in my judgment it would be something upwards of £50,000.
§ Mr. StokesI do not call that anything.