§ 38. Mr. Grimondasked the Secretary of State for the Environment what is the latest estimate of the cost of the current works at the Palace of Westminster associated with the underground car park.
§ Mr. Channon£2.2 million.
§ Mr. GrimondIs not this a bad example of estimating, as the original estimate was £1.3 million? Is it not also a bad example of the choice of priorities in the London area for the House of Commons to spend this vast amount of money on a car park?
§ Mr. ChannonThe estimate is the same as the original sum. There has been no increase in the original estimate. The original figure was £2.2 million, and that is the estimate now. The contract is a firm price one. I know of no reason why costs should increase. This was a decision of the House of Commons, not of the Government.
§ Mr. MartenIs my hon. Friend aware that the affair of the car park will probably mean that people will vote for the new office block opposite, which is no doubt a very good thing?
§ Mr. ChannonThere are divided views in the House about the new office block.
§ Mr. LiptonAre not the Government well bogged down in the mud over the whole project? Has the hon. Gentleman seen figures which suggest that the capital cost per car parked will amount to £10,000?
§ Mr. ChannonI think that that is an exaggeration. I have the figures and perhaps I could give them on the next Question, which is more relevant. But whatever the figures are, the House of Commons was told of them at the time of the debate. My right hon. Friend gave the House the facts and the House accepted them without a Division. The Government, are merely fulfilling the wishes of the House of Commons. I did not think of this project. It was the House of Commons Services Committee that did that.
§ 39. Mr. Grimondasked the Secretary of State for the Environment how many cars the new underground car park at the Palace of Westminster will accommodate.
§ Mr. ChannonRather more than 500.
§ Mr. GrimondThat is a fairly high cost per car. Does not the hon. Gentleman agree, in view of the Prime Minister's strictures about the build-up of traffic around Westminster, that it is desirable not to encourage more cars to come into this area? Has he considered giving vouchers for free travel on public transport to Ministers and Members of Parliament?
§ Mr. ChannonI estimate the cost per parking space to be about £4,450. The decision to build the car park was taken not by the Government but by the House of Commons, without a Division. Hon. Members who are criticising the project now did not vote against it when it was debated. On 13th June the House of Commons unanimously accepted the recommendation of the Services Committee that the car park should be built, and it is being provided to suit the convenience not of the Government but of hon. Members. The decision was taken in the full knowledge of the facts. The estimate has not been increased. I am merely carrying out the instructions given to my Department by the House of Commons.
§ Mr. HefferIs the hon. Gentleman slightly kidding the House? Is it not clear that this proposal was slid through by the Government without hon. Members really knowing, because of the wording, precisely what was involved? Will the hon. Gentleman now ask his right hon. Friend the Leader of the House, who is sitting near him, to give the House a clear and definite statement that in future there will be no more mucking around with the House of Commons without the House properly debating what is actually happening?
§ Mr. ChannonI do not accept that. The House had a full debate on the issue on 13th June. Those hon. Members who now criticise the project had the right to come to the House and vote against it on that occasion. If they chose not to exercise their right to do that they can hardly blame me.
§ Mr. SpearingIn spite of what the Minister has said, does he not recall that in that debate it was stated that the Government got the effective decision approved on a Friday morning, on the nod at 11 a.m., having put the matter on the Order Paper at 9 a.m.? Will he not now agree that that was a shameful, deceitful trick of the House?
§ Mr. ChannonNo, the hon. Member is really going too far—
§ Mr. SpearingNo, it is true.
§ Mr. ChannonThe hon. Member had a perfect opportunity, if he wanted to object to something in the House of Commons. We all know how these procedures work. If hon. Members do not like something, they speak and vote against it—
§ Mr. SpearingWe had two hours' notice.
§ Mr. ChannonIt is a bit rough that I should be criticised in December for a decision that the House of Commons took unanimously in June.