County Hall (Development) (Hansard, 30 June 1988)

§ Mr. Tony Banks (Newham, North-West)

I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 20, for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration, namely, the decision by the London residuary body to dispose of county hall, the home of the former Greater London council, for use as a five-star luxury hotel. This is a specific matter, as it relates to a decision that has not been discussed in the House but which should be, because of the nature of the proposal and the proximity of county hall to the Palace of Westminster.

It is a matter of urgency because the LRB's decision will undoubtedly require the approval of the Secretary of State for the Environment and he should be required to consult the House before reaching his own decision.

It is evident to me that the London residuary body has deliberately chosen for county hall a use that is totally at odds with that building's history as the centre of London local government. I detect in that decision the malevolent influence of the Prime Minister, who has made it clear in a series of well-publicised press briefings that she requires all evidence of the GLC to be removed. To that end, she is prepared to trample on 100 years of local democracy and to reduce local government in this country to near-chaos. I suspect that together with the Secretary of State for Education and Science, she would prefer county hall to be demolished, but on this occasion her Nero-like tendencies have been frustrated by county hall's listed building status.

The House should have an opportunity to hear from the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he is satisfied that the listed building regulations will not be flouted by the development proposals. It should also have an opportunity of deciding whether it wishes to have a hotel so close to Parliament, with all the attendant nuisances during construction, and, after, its visual intrusion and traffic problems. The Secretary of State should be required to explain to the House the apparent conflict between his decision announced on 20 October 1987 to reduce the number of planning permissions for hotel and residential use of the main riverside block and the proposal accepted by the London residuary body, which appears to ignore his previous ruling.

The Secretary of State should also he required to tell the House why he disagreed with his own inspector's recommendation after last year's public inquiry that the main county hall building should be retained for local government activities. Finally, the House should be given an opportunity to hear the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow Secretary of State for the Environment restate their commitment to restoring a Londonwide local government authority and taking county hall back into public ownership by a compulsory purchase, should it be turned into a hotel. The potential developers should have an opportunity to hear those statements before laying their dirty, money-grubbing fingers on county hall.

County hall was purpose-built as the home of the London county council and was paid for by the ratepayers of inner London. Abolishing the democratically elected GLC was an act of unparalleled political vandalism. To convert that historic building into a luxury hotel is an insult to London, an insult to the homeless, and an insult 546 to the fine work of the London county council and the Greater London council. I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to consider very favourably my application under Standing Order No. 20.