§ 32. Mr. Hooleyasked the Lord President of the Council whether he has given consideration recently to the 606 Casson report on providing extra accommodation for hon. Members, and the proposed redevelopment of the Bridge Street site.
§ Mr. BiffenThe House of Commons (Services) Committee recently invited the Accommodation and Administration Sub-Committee to look into the possibility of securing the assistance of private funds in the implementation of Sir Hugh Casson's plans.
§ Mr. HooleyWould it not be rather degrading for the House of Commons to depend on private funds for the accommodation that a modern democratic legislature requires? Will the right hon. Gentleman again look at the matter with a view to making proper provision for the British Parliament from the funds provided by the taxpayer for it to do its job?
§ Mr. BiffenThe most prudent course would be to await the report of the Sub-Committee that is considering the problem.
§ Sir Anthony FellIs my right hon. Friend aware that if this proliferation of Committees continues, hon. Members will not need any offices?
§ Mr. BiffenI note that point, although I am not quite sure what conclusion my hon. Friend wishes me to draw.
§ Mr. William HamiltonDoes the Leader of the House realise that if we got rid of the other place our accommodation problems would be solved at a stroke?
§ Mr. BiffenThat is an interesting point of view, but it would be inappropriate to engage in debate on that matter from the Dispatch Box.
§ Mr. ChapmanWill my right hon. Friend bear in mind that there could be a considerable advantage in using private investment for such accommodation and that it could be done under a lease—back system? Is he aware that if the choice is between public funds never being made available to provide decent office accommodation and making office accommodation possible through private funds, we would find the latter preferable?
§ Mr. BiffenThose factors are being considered by the Sub-Committee of the Services Committee.