THE LORD BISHOP OF SOUTHWARKMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ [The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will conduct a thorough investigation from all points of view into the Greater London Council Plan for a motorway box round inner residential London, before the Greater London Council is authorised to proceed with this project, which might cost over £400 million and cause widespread loss of housing accommodation.]
§ LORD SHEPHERDYes, my Lords. It is my right honourable friend's intention that the Greater London Council's road proposals, including the so-called "motorway box", will be thoroughly examined in the context of the Greater London Development Plan which the Council must submit to him by July 31, 1969.
THE LORD BISHOP OF SOUTHWARKMy Lords, while thanking the noble Lord for his reply, may I ask him whether it is true that under the present plan 30,000 persons would be displaced by the construction of the motorway box alone? And what would be the cost, in financial terms, of removing and rehousing these 30,000 people?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, the figure of 30,000 is the estimate that the Greater London Council have given if the motorway box was developed. The estimate for the cost of this development is some £400 million. This would include the cost of finding new houses and new business accommodation for those who are displaced, but I have no specific figure for meeting that particular cost.
THE LORD BISHOP OF SOUTHWARKMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether the families who are likely to be evicted, and who are deeply concerned by the present proposals, have been offered adequate opportunity of making representation with respect to those proposals? Also, have there been any public inquiries arising out of these proposals, and, if so, what have been the results?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, the time for a public inquiry has not yet arrived, since the Development Plan has not been presented to the Minister; but when that plan is available and is published it may well form part of an inquiry. It may be that the balance of interests between the traffic movement problems and those who are to be displaced, and those who may have increasing inconvenience if a new solution is not found, will be borne in mind and that there should be a separate inquiry.
§ LORD BROOKE OF CUMNORMy Lords, will the Government bear in mind that there has been considerable anxiety about this scheme, which was first produced some three or four years ago? While I do not wish to pronounce on the merits or demerits of the scheme, will the noble Lord bear in mind that a great deal of property has its present value blighted because of uncertainty and that it will be of immense help to everybody if the public inquiry can be expedited?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, the noble Lord will be more aware than most people that it was the London Government Act 1963 that imposed a special duty on the Greater London Council to look at the major problems of transport, and I do not think there is any doubt that all the palliatives, such as off-street parking and the many other factors that help in traffic problems, will not deal with the basic problem of London. We have to find some way of getting long-distance traffic to travel outside London, instead of through it, and this is one of the schemes which have been considered and are now being actively studied by the Greater London Council.
In regard to property, as the noble Lord will be aware there is existing legislation by which owner-occupiers of houses which are on the provisional line of a "box" may serve purchase notices on the local planning authority when they cannot sell except at a reduced price, and applicants refused planning permission on account of the "box" proposals may also serve purchase notices where the land is rendered incapable of reasonably beneficial use.
§ LORD POPPLEWELLMy Lords, can my noble friend assure the House that not only the question of cost but also the whole social environment will be con- 1034 sidered? Will he also assure us that in discussing this matter and preparing their Development Plan the Greater London Council will give serious consideration to the incorporation in the Plan of some form of underground motorways, with a view to dealing with through-traffic, and also to providing parking places which would take the cars off the streets?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, the question of the underground motorway, which the noble Lord mentioned on a previous occasion, has had to be rejected on grounds of cost. I think the House should realise that unless we can find a solution to the problem of keeping traffic out of London we shall see our residential areas continually infiltrated by vehicles. Therefore, we have to weigh the ore with the other.
§ LORD ILFORDMy Lords, will the noble Lord endeavour to ensure that those people who are displaced from their homes by these proposals are rehoused, so far as practicable, in the districts in which they are now living?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, at the present moment these are only proposals. They have to be presented officially by the Greater London Council, and they have up to 1969 so to do. The proposals will have to be considered by the Ministry; and there may well be a public inquiry. Therefore at the present moment there is no question of anyone being displaced as a result of these proposals.
§ LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORDMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that his last point is relevant because there are great social benefits to be derived from this, as well as benefits from the traffic point of view? Further, is the noble Lord aware that the present trend is for traffic to push its way acro3s any residential areas, so that this motorway box should give great social benefits?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, the noble Lord is quite correct. That is why we on this side of the House should like to see as much traffic as possible put on to the railways.
THE LORD BISHOP OF SOUTHWARKMy Lords, would the noble Lord agree that in view of the manifold ramifications of this scheme, and in view of the fact that the central Government are, I 1035 believe, to bear 75 per cent. of the cost of this motorway box, the Government themselves should take responsibility for this scheme?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I think that the right reverend Prelate is going too far at this present stage. The proposals are not yet in front of the Ministry. When they are we shall have to consider how we are going to deal with the people who will be affected.