HC Deb 09 July 1957 vol 573 cc180-1
25. Mr. Stokes

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government the rateable value of the St. James's Theatre; and the estimated value of the site when the theatre has been pulled down.

Mr. H. Brooke

The present rateable value of the St. James's Theatre is £3,283, and the value of the cleared site is estimated at £250,000.

Mr. Stokes

Does not this make nonsense of the statement by the Minister last week? Does he not realise that £250,000 is clearly not included in the rateable value? Surely, if that is so—if I am right in my statement, and I believe that I am—the figure of £50,000 which he mentioned last week for compensation in order not to pull down St. James's Theatre pales into insignificance.

Mr. Brooke

I think it is seldom that one finds that the rateable value exceeds the value of a site in Central London; but I simply informed the House that, if the planning permission granted in 1954 were revoked, I estimated that the compensation from public funds would be upwards of £50,000.

Mr. K. Robinson

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that someone has written to The Times offering to start a subscription fund to reach the figure of £50,000 if he will revoke the planning permission?

Mr. Brooke

I also read another letter in The Times describing how hard it was to run an uneconomic theatre.

Mr. Stokes

May I ask the Minister whether he will now indulge in a little mental arithmetic and assess what would be the 20-year purchase at the rateable value? If he does so, he will find that it is £70,000, whereas the value of the site is £250,000. Therefore, it would be to the national advantage to pay £70,000 in order to acquire it, thereby giving the people an asset value of £250,000.

Mr. Brooke

That is as it may be, but the Socialist-controlled London County Council did not think so.

Mr. Stokes

That is no answer for the Tory Government continuing—

Mr. Speaker

Order. The right hon. Gentleman is making a statement. This is Question Time.

Mr. Stokes

May I ask the Minister, through you, Mr. Speaker, whether he really thinks that is an excuse for the Tory Government continuing to sin against the light?

Mr. Brooke

I have nothing to add to my last rather conclusive reply.