§ 26. Mr. Robert Cookeasked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he proposes to accept the winning 1669 entry of the architectural competition for the parliamentary building on the Bridge Street site, or whether he reserves the right to seek further designs in the event of the competition entries proving unsatisfactory.
§ Mr. C. PannellI must, like any other Minister, always reserve the ultimate decision for Parliament.
§ Mr. CookeIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that that is a most disappointing reply? Can he tell us who has decided what shall go into the buildings, whether plans will eventually be presented to a Committee of this House, and what negotiations are now going on to decide how the matter should be tackled?
§ Mr. PannellIn saying that I should always reserve the ultimate decision for Parliament, I envisage that Parliament will set up proper machinery to receive the necessary information. The hon. Gentleman knows from professional experience that this is a very complicated matter, and these professional and technical considerations are not capable of snap answers.
§ Mr. HoggBut will not the right hon. Gentleman reflect that, although the method of competition for individual building has the appearance of fairness, it is now slipping out of use as a means of selecting the best building designs throughout almost the whole of public and private industry?
§ Mr. PannellI have been seized of that very considerably. The difficulty here is that if we are to discover any new architects it will have to be by means of a competiton. I do not want to refer to the trends in the architectural profession at the present time but we would hope to have the sort of competition which would satisfy everybody and guard against the trends about which the right hon. and learned Gentleman is thinking. It is no use the right hon. and learned Gentleman wagging his head about the matter. I have to apply my mind to it; he does not.