§ LORD STRABOLGI rose to move to resolve, That in the opinion of this House, His Majesty's Government should take immediate steps to secure the Ranelagh Club grounds as an open space. The noble Lord said: My Lords, I beg to move the Resolution which stands in my name. This Resolution raises two quite important matters. I want to say at the beginning that I am not a member of Ranelagh Club, that I have never been a member, that I have been there only once in my life, and that I only speak in this matter as a citizen of London. The first question that arises is whether this open space of 117 acres of parkland so close to the centre of London is to be built over with luxury flats, cinemas and shops, as is proposed, or whether it is to be preserved as an open space as it has been for the last thousand years. From Saxon times, Ranelagh has been first a deer park and ever since an open space. It is only five minutes ride by omnibus from Hammersmith Broadway. There is no space like it so close to London of such an area and in such a perfect position for the recreation and health of the people.
§ The second point of importance concerns the purity of local government. I am not going to mince matters. There are certain scandals connected with the business which should be exposed, which I propose to expose and upon which I hope the Government will take action. The short history of the matter is as follows: There was a domestic dispute within the club and a distinguished gentleman who had been chairman for many years was displaced. Thereupon two new members, the Behars, father and son—I will call attention to their antecedents in a moment—went to him and said that it was very bad luck and that if he would join them in buying up enough shares to get control of the company they would replace him as chairman. They told him that they had the interests of the club at heart and that they wished to preserve it as an open space and so on. The ex-chairman, an old man, "fell" for this, if I may be allowed to use an Americanism. He was taken in by this sort of talk and he covenanted to buy the shares. Then the Behar family proceeded behind his back to buy additional shares and presently 813 he found that they had got control of the company owning the club and trouble began.
§ These Behars have a romantic history. They are of Armenian origin and they began business as carpet merchants in Scotland. Having accumulated money they became interested in real property, and are now estate developers. At the beginning of this business they always pretended that they wished to preserve the club and its amenities and maintain this open space. For an expenditure of, I understand, £30,000 to £40,000 they succeeded in buying up enough shares of the company owning the club to give them control. And, my Lords, what a prize they got! I have seen figures of valuation by very prominent independent valuers, showing that if those 117 acres of land so close to London could be freed of all building restrictions of the town-planning scheme and everything else, and just be thrown into the market for any kind of building development, they would have a value of over£2,500,000. That is their open market value, free of all restrictions and covenants: £2,500,000, for an expenditure of £30,000 or £40,000 in buying these shares and then, by a most extraordinary piece of chicanery, getting hold of the freehold from the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for a sum of about £78,000. For an expenditure altogether of about £100,000 they got this site, which is worth in the open market £2,500,000. Of course they can afford to do all kinds of things with stakes of that kind before them.
§ Having done that, they then proceeded to get into touch with certain members of the Barnes Council—the Borough of Barnes I have here with me letters from four of the councillors of Barnes which I am going to take leave to send to the noble Viscount, Lord Gage, who represents the Ministry of Health in this House with such ability and brilliance, and I am going to invite his attention to these letters from these public representatives making the gravest accusations against the clique on the Barnes Corporation who formed this arrangement with the new owners of the majority of shares in the club. What they had to do with the Barnes Council was to have this open park-land, which was scheduled, or going to be scheduled, as an open space, taken out of the town-planning scheme. That would of course have stopped all 814 building development, and their object was by hook or by crook to get it taken out—decontrolled—so that they would be free to benefit by speculative building. The first inkling of what was afoot only came out and became known to the majority of the Council on June 12, 1935. The majority of the councillors of Barnes—the City Fathers of Barnes—knew nothing whatever about this business until they received a memorandum, marked "Secret and Confidential," in which the scheme was disclosed: to build 3,000 luxury flats—I understand of eight storeys—shops, cinemas, garages, filling stations for petrol, and all the rest of it, to accommodate a population of some 15,000 people.
§ I do not know what the Ministry of Transport will have to say about this; but your Lordships are aware that the western exits of London are very congested at present, and if the promoters are going to put down there, on this last remaining open space, a new town of 15,000 people, it is going to increase very much the difficulties of getting in and out of London. I would remind your Lordships that this part of London is not well blessed with open places. Barnes Common in the week-end, during the fine weather, is very crowded indeed; Richmond Park is crowded on Saturdays and Sundays even in winter; it is seriously congested with people. Every inch of space which can be used for playing games in Richmond Park is used by young men for football in winter and for cricket in summer, and there is too little room altogether.
§ How did this extraordinary arrangement with the Barnes Council come about? This is the fact to which I would particularly wish to draw the attention of the noble Viscount, Lord Gage. The business of taking this space out of the town-planning scheme and decontrolling it was rushed through in the holiday season at an emergency meeting on July 31, 1935. Only ten out of the thirty-two elected councillors of Barnes—councilors and aldermen—voted for this scheme being taken out of the town plan. One of the aldermen protested at the way they were being rushed. He asked for postponement on the ground that they had very little time—half-an-hour, actually—to consider a long and complex legal document. His motion to postpone discussion was lost by ten votes to eleven. 815 At the next meeting, held on August 16, 1935, it was disclosed that an important letter from the chairman and another member of the board of the club, protesting against what was afoot and written on their behalf by their solictiors, had never been laid before the Council, its sub-committee dealing with this matter, or the town-planning committee. What happened was that the chairman of the club and another member of the board—the chairman of the board of directors of the company that owns the club, and another director—became alarmed, and warned the Barnes Corporation in an official letter written by their solicitors to the Town Clerk that the negotiators who had been in treaty with the Barnes Corporation were not authorised to come to any conclusion without the final approval of the board. This letter reached the Town Clerk of Barnes, was shown to the chairman of the town-planning committee, and was suppressed. It was not put before the members of the Council; it was kept from them.
§ The gentleman who seems to have played the principal part in this extraordinary business is an ex-mayor of Barnes who has been many years on the Council: an alderman, Mr. Jackson by name, who is himself a partner in a firm of estate developers and whose two sons are engaged in the building business on a large scale in the district. I am afraid there is here a fairly clear case of improper influence, to speak perfectly plainly. As I said at the beginning of my remarks, my Lords, there is not only the question of this great open space, but also of the purity of public administration in this country. No satisfactory explanation has ever been given for the suppression of that letter. I have four letters from councillors; I did not know these people; it is only since it was known that this Motion was coming on in your Lordships' House that they have written to me. They are strangers to me, but I am going to send their letters to the noble Viscount who speaks for the Ministry of Health. They make it clear in writing that if they had known of this letter they never would have consented to the proposal going through.
§ As to the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, the grounds were leased from the Commission on a 999 years' lease. It was necessary, of course, if this plot were to 816 go through, that the freehold should be obtained. It was obtained for a very modest sum, in view of the value of this wonderful piece of land. I have here a letter from the Commissioners which I shall be very glad to send to the noble Viscount. They said quite plainly that it was represented to them that the one idea was to preserve this land as an open space; there was no intention of building, only of preserving its amenities and its beauties. They were misled in the same way.
§ I think your Lordships will agree that if these facts are true—and I think they can be proved; I have satisfied myself of their accuracy—this is a very grave scandal indeed. Ah, yes, but think of the value of the prize when built over with luxury flats: £2,500,000 for the expenditure of about £100,000—what the Americans would call "a killing" ! I think the Government must really step in in this case. I hope that in the first place they will inquire very fully into what I have been saying and the facts I have disclosed. At the end of August, 1935, one of these councillors, who had become thoroughly suspicious by that time—one of the honest men on the Barnes Council—wrote to the Ministry of Health inviting an inquiry and asking for one. He got back the ordinary formal letter that an inquiry could only be instituted at the request of the Council of Barnes itself. I think that covers the ground, except for one point. This land is not really suitable for building; at any rate on the river side, because it is liable to flooding. I have photographs showing very extensive floods at the beginning of this month. But these gentry, these building speculators, have also entered into an agreement with the Barnes Corporation, which is tucked away in a long document, in which, if there is flooding after building, the Barnes Corporation will have to use the ratepayers' money to erect anti-flood works. That makes the business all the more sinister.
§ I do not know whether I am right in saying that the London County Council in this matter are practically powerless. The club members themselves are certainly in a difficult position. There is litigation going on, with which I am not concerned. There are actions and cross-actions, but I know nothing about the legal business afoot and I think the only 817 people who can act here are the Government. It will be said, I am told, that the speculator's are only going to build over one little strip of land now, but it will ruin the club as a club, and then, of course, it will be possible to say that they cannot carry on financially and the rest of the land must be built over. This scheme as disclosed in fact shows that all but thirty acres will be built over with skyscraper flats, shops and cinemas. Once this is done this wonderful open space will be gone. I am not thinking of it so much as a club, but as an open space for the people of this country, where they can enjoy recreation and make themselves fit as citizens of this country. On these grounds I appeal to the House, and to the Government, to support my Motion. I beg to move.
§ Moved to resolve, That in the opinion of this House, His Majesty's Government should take immediate steps to secure the Ranelagh Club grounds as an open space. —(Lord Strabolgi.)
VISCOUNT GAGEMy Lords, I think everyone feels sympathy with the noble Lord in his desire to preserve Ranelagh. Everyone would regret its passing; and I quite agree that it is to be deprecated if the unnecessary population of London is to be increased. Although I very much appreciate the unsolicited testimonial which he handed to me, we have to deal with the matter not only as a question of sympathy but as a question of law and as a question of finance. As I understand it the position is this, that following the information that this land was coming on the market the Barnes Council entered into an agreement, under Section 34 of the Town Planning Act, with the owners. I would like to point out that any town-planning authority can enter into an agreement under this section. I am aware that various points have been raised about the validity of this agreement in particular, and, as the noble Lord rather hinted, there is an action pending about the validity of this particular agreement. I think, therefore, it would be improper for me to express an opinion on that matter, but it is true that any town-planning authority has power to make such an agreement, and the Minister has no power to prevent such agreements being concluded.
As to the terms of this agreement, if the Barnes Corporation wished to purchase or 818 preserve this piece of land as an open space they could have done so, but as the land was worth, I am informed, somewhere in the neighbourhood of £800 per acre, they would have incurred a liability of somewhere in the neighbourhood of £750,000 in compensation, and that was clearly beyond the means of the Barnes Corporation to do. It is true that it is within the power of the London County Council and of the Surrey County Council to make contributions, but they have not done so, and no doubt they take the view that having regard to the proximity of Barnes Common, Richmond Park, Putney Heath, and Wimbledon Common it is very difficult to justify the acquisition of more open spaces for the public at such a figure. The noble Lord spoke of open spaces. I presume that the noble Lord meant public open spaces and not private open spaces.
LORD STRABOLGII did not propose the spending of public money to keep this open as a private club, but I understand there will be great difficulty, after what has happened in keeping the club going as a private concern, and I therefore want this land to be open to the public.
VISCOUNT GAGEI so understood the noble Lord. But I must point out that although the County Councils have this power of contributing, which for the reasons which I have surmised they have not done, the Minister has no fund out of which to make contributions for the preservation of open spaces, even if it is considered desirable. In these circumstances the Barnes Corporation have had to make the best of the situation, and certainly in this agreement they have obtained certain conditions of some value. They have, I understand, obtained agreed conditions as to the height of buildings. The noble Lord talked about skyscraper flats. I think that is an exaggeration, for I understand that the height of buildings is to be strictly controlled. There are also conditions for the preservation of trees, and they have secured hundred feet strips by the river for acquisition or lease by the Council, and conditions as to the preservation of the club house and thirty surrounding acres, with an option to the Council to purchase if it comes on the market.
That is the bare story, so far as the official information goes. Unofficially 819 we know that there has been a good deal of dispute on various points. Indeed, one of the difficulties of discussing the matter from a departmental point of view is the immense amount of litigation either pending or threatened. We understand that a dispute has arisen as to whether the directors have the power to offer the land for sale, and that is sub judice, and therefore I cannot talk with quite the same freedom as the noble Lord did. I have already referred to the action as to the validity of the agreement, and now on top of that there is a suggestion made by the noble Lord, which I had heard in a less definite form, that there have been very grave irregularities about the circumstances in which this agreement was made, quite apart from the point of whether it was ultra vires.
I appreciate that the noble Lord did write to me to indicate roughly what he was going to say, but I did not know the exact charges that he was going to bring. But so far as I have been able to ascertain the Ministry have no power to make the inquiries that he suggests, even if there was evidence of these irregularities, which so far we have not received. I can refer him to the Local Government Act, 1933, Section 76 of which deals with the question of members of the Council being personally interested in a contract. I do not know whether that quite applies to the case that he has made, but if it does subsection (7) of that section says:
A prosecution for an offence under this section shall not be instituted except by or on behalf of the Director of Public Prosecutions.That definitely puts the obligation to take action on the Director of Public Prosecution, and of course there is the remedy of the Courts. I am sorry that I cannot give more assistance to the noble Lord. My right honourable friend is naturally very interested in any matter affecting the planning of London, and has indeed offered to preside at an informal conference between the owners and members of the club if both parties would like him to do so. But it is obviously not a matter which he could take up in his official capacity. I hope my noble friend will understand that the Department are doing what they can in the interests of amenity, but they are under very obvious statutory limitations, which it is all the more important to respect in view of the very contentious atmosphere with which 820 the whole of the affair is surrounded. Therefore we cannot, I am afraid, accept the Motion which he has put forward.
§ LORD ADDISONMay I ask the noble Viscount two questions which he does not appear to have referred to? Has a town-planning scheme with regard to this area been submitted to the Ministry, and, if so, has the Minister held an inquiry into it before sanctioning it, if he has sanctioned it?
VISCOUNT GAGEI understand that there has been a draft scheme submitted, which was approved and in which this piece of land was reserved as a private open space. But that was in the days when there was no suggestion of any sale being effected. The case was quite clearly altered when the club or the directors showed intention of selling this land, because the whole question of compensation arose, and I understand that, although I do not think the town-planning scheme has reached the inquiry stage, nevertheless this agreement, which of course can be scheduled to the scheme, has, I understand, taken the place of the restrictions that were then imposed in that draft scheme.
§ LORD ADDISONI understand that a provisional scheme was submitted to the Minister, in which this part was scheduled as a private open space, and that as such it was provisionally sanctioned. If so, may I ask if the Minister is prepared before sanctioning any alteration of that scheme to hold an inquiry?
VISCOUNT GAGEI think the noble Lord is trying to get me to make a general observation on the position of agreements; I know sufficient about that to know that it is a matter of some complexity, and if he wishes me to enter into that I should prefer that he gave notice. He asks if the Minister is prepared to hold an inquiry into this particular part of the scheme.
§ LORD ADDISONI am sorry to keep interrupting. I mean the amended scheme.
VISCOUNT GAGEI do not think any finality is given by the fact of the draft scheme being considered by the Minister. These schemes go through various stages, and finality is given to a scheme when the official inquiry takes place. I do not think 821 that the fact that re-zoning of a particular piece of land after a certain stage has taken place has really very great significance, unless that is done after the official inquiry has taken place. I do not really think that the Minister would be empowered to have a special inquiry into the circumstances in which this agreement was made after the draft scheme had been submitted to him but before the official inquiry took place.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORDMy Lords, I am very glad to hear from the noble Viscount that the Minister of Health is prepared, if the parties agree, to preside over an informal conference of those persons who are interested. The Minister of Health is an extremely well-informed and extremely adroit negotiator, and I do not think anybody could produce better results than are likely to be obtained from Sir Kingsley Wood. I should like to say that it is not only my opinion that Sir Kingsley Wood is concerned but the Minister of Health, and I think the Minister of Health in this matter has probably got greater powers than Sir Kingsley Wood, and I very much hope that the matter will not end as the noble Viscount, Lord Gage, has left it. He knows very well, being so much concerned with town planning in his great county, in which he has performed such valuable services to the public, how complex is the law of town planning, and the story unfolded by Lord Strabolgi, I think, sufficiently gives concrete proof of that fact. But really I do not feel that the matter can stay as it has been left this afternoon. I think the noble Viscount, Lord Gage, rather indicated that he was prepared to go into it a little further, and, if so, I think it would be within the bounds of Parliamentary propriety if the noble Lord, Lord Strabolgi, asked leave to withdraw this Motion now and put it down for some subsequent date when the complete answer can be given. At the present stage the answer is not only incomplete but rather unhappily so. The allegation made by Lord Strabolgi, who knows no more about Ranelagh Park than I do, except the information that he gets from interested parties, is that the decision was reached without the full facts being disclosed. I did not quite hear him, but I thought he said that the Ecclesiastical Commissioners equally had parted with their share in the estate without knowing the full facts of the case.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORDWell, that is a very grave allegation to make. I thought Lord Strabolgi said he had it in writing.
THE EARL OF CRAWFORDIn those circumstances would it not be better that we should go into the matter at some later stage? I do not like the view expressed by the noble Viscount, Lord Gage, that it is hard to justify the maintenance of this place as an open space because Richmond Park is close by. It is impossible to have too many open spaces within twenty-five miles of Charing Cross. The growing needs for healthy physique, for recreation, for repose in London are tremendous and increasing in intensity every day, and I am sure it is wrong for the Ministry of Health to look upon this open space as superfluous just because Richmond Park is close by. The noble Lord, Lord Strabolgi, was quite right in saying that Richmond Park is already congested. It is crowded with motor cars, with people playing games and lying about on the grass, horses galloping all over the place, and so on. Every acre that can be preserved within twenty-five miles of Charing Cross ought to be preserved for the good of the public, and I hope that view will be shared in a more sympathetic manner by the Ministry of Health.
§ LORD MANCROFTI hope I may be allowed to support what my noble friend has just said. I have recollection of circumstances in which we were able, when I was in the House of Commons, to prevent flats being put up at Regent's Park. It is true there was in that case no question of unworthy conduct. But we have heard in your Lordships' House two allegations of unworthy conduct, of contracts made where good faith was not kept. I do not think public opinion will allow this matter to go further forward unless His Majesty's Government tries to find some means of reopening the whole question by means of an inquiry to settle the matter.
VISCOUNT GAGEMay I be allowed to point out that neither the noble Lord nor the noble Earl dealt in any way with the real difficulty in which the Ministry is this afternoon—namely, that there are at least two, if not several more, legal 823 actions being fought on these points, particularly on the point of the validity of the agreement under which this whole question arises.
§ LORD MANCROFTI cannot, of course, refer to matters which are sub judice, but I am sure public opinion will not be content unless these allegations are put to rest. My noble friend should find some means through his Department or some other Department, or even through the Public Prosecutor, to bring home unworthy dealings such as have been suggested. Some means ought to be found whereby a judicial decision can bring the matter to finality, because public opinion will require this matter to be straightened out.
LORD STRABOLGIMy Lords, I am very much obliged to the noble Lords who have spoken on this grave matter and to the noble Viscount for his reply. He said he had not heard of these charges. Neither had I. It was only when I put this Motion down that they rained in 824 upon me from disinterested people. They are elected representatives of the people, public men, and they have asked for this matter to be looked into. I recognise the difficulty about the legal actions, but I hope when they are settled that this matter may be gone into further. With regard to the offer of the Minister of Health to arbitrate unofficially, which is typical of his great interest in these public matters, I am advised that that offer has never reached the members of the club who are trying to prevent this exploitation of their property. They know nothing about that; but I will take steps to see it is brought to their notice. I hope, when I send these papers to my noble friend which I had not got when I put down my Motion, that the Ministry will look into this matter again, and I gather they will do so. I intend to return to this business later. In the meantime I beg leave to withdraw my Motion.
§ Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
§ House adjourned at six minutes before six o'clock.