HL Deb 15 May 1857 vol 145 cc301-7
THE DUKE OF SOMERSET

rose to put a question to the Lord President, respecting the Commission on the Designs for Public Offices. He understood that within the last few days a Royal Commission had been appointed to examine and report on the designs now being exhibited in Westminster Hall. Their Lordships would remember that we had had such Commissions in former times, and that on their reports we had begun buildings which we had not finished yet, and which he was afraid we should continue to build for a long time to come, while no one could tell what we should have to pay before we saw their completion. He begged to warn the Government as to what they were about to undertake. He was afraid they were going to begin an expenditure which would be almost ruinous in the end. First of all they had invited architects to exhibit competing plans for public offices, and he believed all the way from the Horse Guards to Westminster was given up to the taste of the artist. Indeed, he understood Westminster-bridge was included also. Some time ago it was proposed to take down that bridge. Then the Government determined to repair it, and now again it seemed to be in contemplation to take it down. The Chancellor of the Exchequer stated in the course of the last Parliament, as a warning to the country, that the block of ground which was required for the scheme now proposed would cost £1,500,000. That was for the ground only. When we began these buildings (the Houses of Parliament) we had at least the ground, which belonged to the Government, a very small portion only having been bought. But if the plans now proposed were carried out, did anybody suppose that the ground could be bought at £1,500,000? Any one who knew the commercial spirit of this metropolis must be aware that the price of the land would be immediately greatly enhanced. But how far were these plans to be carried out? When the Commissioners had agreed upon a particular plan, Government would come down to Parliament for a vote of perhaps £50,000 on account this year, £40,000 next year, and so on for probably a period of not less than twenty-five years. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that to carry out the plans covering this block of ground would cost £5,000,000 or £6,000,000. Now, were we wise in beginning a scheme of this kind? What he wished to know was, what instructions had been given to the architects as to the ground they were to cover; how far Parliament would be bound by the decision of the Commission; and how we were to guard ourselves against an expenditure which we had been told by high authority would amount to not much less than £5,000,000 or £6,000,000, on the ground that we had not made any objection or taken sufficient notice of the matter in time?

EARL GRANVILLE

said, his noble Friend warned the Government against beginning a system of ruinous expenditure; but he begged to remind his noble Friend that every step which had been taken by the Government in this matter had been in accordance with the recommendations of a Committee of the other House of Parliament, which recommendations had been also very generally approved by the Members of their Lordships' House. The first question asked by his noble Friend, as he understood it, amounted to this—whether any instructions had been given to architects as to what site they might occupy. He would answer that by going back to some of the steps recommended by the Select Committee of the House of Commons. They stated in their Report that great inconvenience at present arose from the bad arrangement of the public offices; from the necessity laid upon Government of hiring buildings in inconvenient situations at most exorbitant rates; and that it was most desirable, both for the convenience and efficiency of the public service and on the ground of economy, that there should be a concentration of the public offices, and that such concentration should be in the vicinity of Whitehall and the Houses of Parliament. The Committee described the position and extent of the sites which they recommended, which was bounded by the banks of the Thames, Richmond Terrace, Downing Street, and New Palace Yard; and they concluded by recommending that in case Parliament approved of the purchase of the site, the designs for the public offices should be submitted to public competition. The Government, acting on that recommendation, had issued notices, in which the architects of all nations were invited to send in designs for two different sites. One was for the block of buildings covering the whole of the larger site recommended by the Committee; another was for two offices—namely, the War-office and the Foreign- office —on a smaller site adjoining Charles Street, of which the Government was now in possession, with the exception of a very small portion indeed. A Bill would be introduced to Parliament giving power to purchase that small portion of the smaller site to which he had just alluded, and when that Bill came before them, then would be the proper time for raising opposition to the scheme. As to the larger site, the Government had no plan of their own, and thought it best to leave the matter open to public competition, giving to architects an opportunity of showing how they would fill it up. Parliament could then choose whether they would go on with the scheme or with a part of it, having the public offices in a well-devised and properly-arranged manner, all connected with each other, instead of being, as now, disconnected. This would be matter for future consideration. It was, however, clearly laid down that the architects would have no claim whatever, except for the prize money offered for the several designs that might be approved. The plans would become the absolute copyright of the Government, to choose from the several plans the whole or such parts as might be found desirable; but the architects would not have the slightest claim to be employed in the execution of the works.

THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH

, though holding in great respect Reports of Committees of the House of Commons, did not think it necessary for their Lordships at once to acquiesce in the Resolution to which the Committee had come in this instance. He had not had an opportunity of giving notice of the question, but he would take the liberty of asking the noble Earl opposite whether it was absolutely necessary to occupy Westminster Hall, and to engage in an undertaking which would involve all this enormous expense? It was quite obvious that it would be perfectly impossible to complete the contemplated buildings without incurring an expenditure which would probably exceed the whole amount raised by the property tax of 7d. in the pound for a whole year. Was it not possible to make some arrangement by which to avoid that enormous expense? The Houses of Parliament had been building ever since the year 1834, and they well knew to what an enormous extent the estimate of the architect had been exceeded. Some of their Lordships were, perhaps, pleased; others, however, like himself, were morti- fied and disgusted by the extravagance of the expenditure incurred. He readily admitted the beauty of all that had been done; but unfortunately it had been overdone—the expenditure was unnecessary and out of all character for the purposes for which their Lordships assembled. No doubt there might be great convenience in having all the Government offices under the same roof; but then, there was the danger of fire, which, humanly speaking, it was impossible by any provision altogether to prevent. The force of a fire when it once took possession of a great building was such that none of their precautions could save it. That was one main objection to continuous buildings. But let them consider how they stood. They had been building for the last quarter of a century. In the course of that time they had so far added to Buckingham Palace as practically to have made it a new palace, of which the Crown was not before in possession. He recollected a King living comfortably enough in St. James's Palace, and keeping his court there. Give him leave to ask what was the use of that palace at the present moment? Why should they not appropriate it to public offices? All these buildings were the property of the Crown, just as much as the Royal Palaces; and was it possible to find any building more convenient for a Foreign-office, more especially for the receptions which were necessary in the Foreign-office, than St. James's? If the noble Earl at the head of the Foreign-office were permitted to occupy that palace he thought he might give a dinner on the Queen's birthday without the smallest danger. Then, what was the use of Marlborough House? They had some trash collected there which, he regretted to say, he had recently lost half an hour in inspecting, but which might be packed up and removed without the slightest inconvenience to anybody. He understood that Marlborough House was to be appropriated to the residences of the Prince of Wales. It was utterly unsuited for any such purpose. There was not a room in the house in which his Royal Highness could with convenience or propriety hold a reception. It was, however, admirably adapted for a public office, which required small rooms; whilst a residence for the Prince of Wales would require large rooms; in short, the Prince would not be able to occupy it with propriety or decency, unless at an expenditure of £50,000 or £100,000 to render it habitable. Then there was Schomberg House, adjoining, the lease of which he understood was for sale. By the purchase of that, the communication between St. James's Palace, Marlborough House, and the Ordnance-office would be complete. Now, if the House of Commons would not do its duty in these matters, their Lordships, though it was foreign to their general practice, must interfere and call public attention to them. The public must not be left without one House of Parliament, at all events, to attend to that economy so important to the public interests.

THE EARL OF MALMESBURY

said, that one of the reasons given by the noble Earl for this immense expenditure was the saving of some £30,000 a year which was now paid for the hire of offices. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, however, had told them that if they followed out the proposed plan, the ground alone would cost a million and a half of money. Thus, before the foundation was laid, or one brick placed upon another, at 4 percent, they would have to pay £60,000 a year as ground-rent.

EARL GRANVILLE

said, what he had stated was, that Government had formed no intention to apply to Parliament for its approval of the large plan to which the noble Earl alluded.

THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH

said, that he admitted the necessity of some change as regarded the Foreign-office, for it was known that the present building had been in a very dangerous state for many years past. But as to the War-office, every day the accommodation wanted there was less and less, for every day the noble Lord at the head of that department was diminishing the army in a manner that to him (the Earl of Ellenborough) was most alarming. It was only a week ago that he saw it announced that there was to be a considerable diminution effected in every company of artillery. Now, for the last few years everybody had been calling out for an increase in this arm of the service; and they were told that it had been increased, and that the increase would be maintained. He could not, therefore, understand how with an army, now weak and daily diminishing, they were to have a staff constantly increasing and demanding larger accommodation.

LORD CAMPBELL

had a word or two to say about the courts of justice. He did not complain of the accommodation provided for the Judges, but the accommodation for the jury, who had to neglect their business for the purpose of attending there without remuneration, was most disgraceful. For visitors there was no accommodation whatever, and he really felt ashamed when distinguished jurists from America or the Continent were introduced to him for the purpose of witnessing the manner in which the proceedings in our courts of justice were conducted. He by no means wished to have a large expenditure incurred; but he really thought that what was decent and necessary for those who took part in the administration of the law ought not to be overlooked. The front of the law courts, they were told—and it was very obviously true—interfered with the regularity and beauty of Sir Charles Barry's building. He should rejoice to see some plan by which, without; transferring the law courts from Westminster Hall, where they were placed by immemorial prescriptive right, the objection might be removed.

THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE

denied that the Government bound itself to any great expenditure, because it said that improvements being necessary in some offices in that part of London care should be taken not to allow those improvements to interfere with any future plan that might be adopted.

LORD REDESDALE

said, he had been one of the first to call their Lordships' attention to the proceedings about to be taken with regard to the restoration of the public offices in Downing Street. It appeared to him that the scheme which the Government supported was one which would lead to a far greater expenditure than if they adopted the larger plan in the first instance. If the block of houses behind Downing Street was the proper site, it might be purchased upon much more advantageous terms now than on a future occasion. The purchase by Government of one side of one of the shabbiest streets in the neighbourhood would encourage the substitution of better houses for the old ones; thus, in the event of their hereafter requiring the remainder of the street, they would have to pay an increased value for it. Whether, therefore, they erected their public buildings in one place or another, or made them continuous buildings or not, it would certainly be economical and prudent that they should determine what ground they could more advantageously acquire at one time than another. By proceeding piecemeal in a matter of this sort they would first improve the value of the property around, and afterwards have to pay for the increased value so created. If they got possession of the ground now there was no necessity for its being immediately appropriated. He was quite convinced that, if there was an intention to erect new public buildings in Downing Street, and obtain more ground for public offices, the truest economy would be to purchase at once the ground about Charles Street and Duke Street and the shabby buildings immediately adjoining.

House adjourned at Seven o'clock, to Monday next, Twelve o'clock.