HC Deb 06 June 1961 vol 641 cc858-60
17. Mr. Driberg

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he will seek to ensure some flexibility in the internal planning of the new office blocks now being built or projected in London, so that when they become redundant they will be readily and economically convertible for housing purposes.

Mr. Brooke

Planning control does not extend to the internal planning of buildings. I have no powers, therefore, to require flexibility in internal design.

Mr. Driberg

Is it the Minister's view that there will ever be redundancy in office blocks in London? Will a point ever be reached at which he will think that there are enough of them, or too many? Will the right hon. Gentleman also give an undertaking that when they are redundant, as in the case of State House, the Government will not always come to the rescue of these profiteering developers and rent space for Departments which would be better housed outside London?

Mr. Brooke

As the hon. Gentleman knows, I am extremely anxious that those who possibly can should move their offices outside London rather than occupy offices in central London. The hon. Gentleman's Question as to future redundancy is one that neither he nor I can answer with certainty, but I should dearly like to see the time come when the rent that can be obtained for office space in London begins to fail. But I am afraid that moment has not yet come.

18. Mr. Driberg

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he has looked at St. James's Palace from the top of St. James's Street since the Mill-bank tower was built, and at the steeple of All Souls', Langham Place, from the south since the Broadcasting House extension was built; and if, before permission is given for the building of major new office blocks, he will give an assurance that he will consider, from various planning aspects, their effect on the urban skyline.

Mr. Brooke

Planning permission for both the new buildings referred to was given by the London County Council as local planning authority. I know it is the policy of the council that each proposal for a high building shall be considered on its merits, including its effect on the skyline. I apply a similar policy to applications or appeals which come to me for decision.

Mr. Driberg

Is the Minister aware that before permission was given for the Shell building—although it is not a particularly good example—a balloon was flown at the projected height of the building and that members of the Royal Fine Art Commission were taken in a coach to look at the balloon from various points of view? Why was not something similar done when the Millbank tower was projected?

Mr. Brooke

As I explained to the hon. Gentleman, neither of these two developments came to me at all, and I cannot speak for the precautions which the London County Council, as local planning authority, sought to take. As the hon. Gentleman may know, the L.C.C. has a set of questions which it applies to every proposition for a high building that comes before it. I think that it is a sensible set of questions. I believe that these decisions are difficult to take. Of course, existing high buildings like Big Ben and the Victoria Tower may have seemed very much out of place when first built; yet after the years we have become accustomed to them.

Sir G. Nicholson

What does my right hon. Friend mean by that reply? Does he mean that he washes his hands completely of anything done in London unless it comes directly under him? If so, it just is not good enough.

Mr. Brooke

I mean that throughout the country and not only in London, local planning authorities have powers to take decisions. I am reluctant to remove those powers and to call in applications unless that is absolutely essential. The L.C.C. has announced a set of tests which it applies to projects for high building which come before it. I believe that these tests are sensible tests.

Mr. MacColl

Is not this another argument for extending the powers of appeal to third parties who are affected by planning decisions?

Mr. Brooke

I think that the hon. Gentleman will be aware that the Franks Committee examined that proposition and rejected it.