HC Deb 15 November 1965 vol 720 cc663-6
22. Mr. A. Royle

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what considerations he took into account in arriving at his decision that the design of the Government offices on the Bridge Street-Richmond Terrace site should be entrusted to his Department.

27. Mr. Goodhew

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works what steps he is taking to reconcile his proposal for a new building on the site at Parliament Street with the proposal in the Martin Report that the area should be developed in conjunction with the other side of Whitehall; and whether he intends to appoint a third architect to plan the building on the other side of Whitehall to replace the Great George Street Government offices.

Mr. C. Pannell

My Department will have to analyse the users' needs for all these buildings and to work out with Sir Leslie Martin the planning principles that are to govern the development as a whole. This experience will be carried through into the design of the Bridge Street office building which will be the pilot project for the entire complex.

It is too early to consider who should design the new offices on the Great George Street site, but the general planning principles will also be applied to them and to the new building on the Foreign Office site.

Mr. Royle

Is the right hon. Gentleman sticking to the statement he made on 3rd November that the design of the Government offices on the Bridge Street-Richmond Terrace site will be done by his Department? If so, will be bear in mind the very poor effort which the architects in his Department have made of many buildings overseas in the past few years? Would it not be better to open the design to world competition rather than to have it done by architects in his own Department?

Mr. Pannell

The hon. Gentleman is on very dangerous ground sometimes when he attempts adverse comment on the relationship between public and private architects. I may tell him that, in certain cases, I have some very valid objections to both.

Mr. Goodhew

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that this area forms part of one side of Parliament Square and that it is vital for the Government to do a little more in the way of coordination?

Mr. Pannell

My Department has designed many important buildings throughout the world, which must have escaped the attention of the hon. Member for Richmond, Surrey (Mr. A. Royle). But, again, I would say that I am as sensitive as anybody here to what is required of any Minister of Works planning a site of that description.

Mr. Strauss

Would not the Minister clarify the position? Is it the fact that the other three important parts of this project are to be done, one by a selected architect and one by an architect chosen by competition, but that this key position, of immense importance and with immense problems, is to be dealt with by the architects in his own Department? Is he satisfied that this is the right thing to do, and would he not consider it again before making a final decision?

Mr. Pannell

I have made the decision and the Government have accepted the decision, and it is seemly that my Department should do this—[HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] If I had put it out that an unspecified private architect was to do it, hon. Members opposite would probably have agreed without knowing who he was—[HON. MEMBERS: "Competition."] There is to be competition for a part of the total development. I think that there is a great deal of architectural talent concentrated in my Department.

Mr. Boyd-Carpenter

While casting no aspersions whatever on the very able architects in the right hon. Gentleman's Department, surely, as has been pointed out, the crucial importance of this site to the whole of this part of London means that the right hon. Gentleman should have the widest possible field of choice in selecting the architect for the task. Will he not, whether he has made a decision or not, have the good sense to reconsider the matter?

Mr. Pannell

I do not know that the right hon. Gentleman is an authority on good sense. As a matter of fact, I have had this under a great deal of review. I have had a good deal of professional advice of all sorts. A decision had to be taken by someone, and it has been taken.

Mr. Royle

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the thoroughly unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

25. Mr. Goodhew

asked the Minister of Public Building and Works why he proposes to seek the services of two different architects to plan adjoining buildings for parliamentary and Government offices in the area bounded by Bridge Street, Parliament Street and Richmond Terrace.

Mr. C. Pannell

As I said in my statement of 3rd November, we need to draw on a range of architectural talent both in my own Department and in private practice.

Mr. Goodhew

But what efforts is the right hon. Gentleman making to be quite certain that this will form an integrated whole with Parliament Square when it is finished?

Mr. Pannell

We are, of course, retaining Sir Leslie Martin as principal consultant. I answered the Question in part in the Answer I gave to a previous Question, that my Department has designed many important buildings throughout the world and we have unique experience in planning for the uses and needs of others. It seems to me that with the principal consultant we shall get the degree of unification, integration and harmony of design to which both the hon. Gentleman and I aspire.