§ 2.48 p.m.
§ LORD SANDYSMy 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 have formulated plans for increased assistance to historic towns and historic buildings.]
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE, DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (LORD SANDFORD)My Lords, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State hopes that the increase from £700,000 to £1 million in the annual amount of grants he can offer on the recommendation of the Historic Buildings Council for England will make it possible roughly to double the level of expenditure on town schemes as well as increase substantially expenditure on individual buildings of outstanding historic interest. I shall be meeting the Historic Buildings Council to-morrow to discuss the way in which the increased allocation can best be apportioned.
§ LORD SANDYSMy Lords, while thanking my noble friend for that very encouraging reply, may I ask him whether he can say what co-ordination has been 176 arranged between the town hall and Whitehall in town scheme grants, especially for historic towns?
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, the local authority applies to the Historic Buildings Council. If the Council recommend that the buildings collectively are of outstanding historic or architectural interest, they are eligible as a group; they do not have to be outstanding individually. Buildings, whether in historic towns or elsewhere, which are individually outstanding are eligible for Historic Buildings Council grants in the normal way. The Historic Buildings Council make it a condition of a scheme that the area concerned should be included in a designated conservation area.
§ THE EARL OF LAUDERDALEMy Lords, can my noble friend say whether the improvements he has mentioned will apply also to the Scottish Historic Buildings Council?
§ LORD SANDFORD: No, my Lords; that is another question.
§ LORD GISBOROUGHMy Lords, would not the noble Lord agree that the penalty for the demolition of scheduled historic buildings is still totally inadequate in relation to the benefit which a developer may receive for having a cleared site?
§ LORD SANDFORDNo, my Lords; I do not think I would agree that the penalty is inadequate, but that is a different subject. I will go into it, however, if the noble Lord will put down a Question.
§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, while all sides of your Lordships' House will welcome the increase of £300,000 a year in the H.B.C. money, could the noble Lord remind the House what was the annual rate of money for historic towns which was committed by the former Government and cancelled by this Government on January 1 of this year?
§ LORD SANDFORDNo, my Lords; I am not aware that we cancelled any grants for town schemes. We maintained the last increase which the Government had made, from £575,000 to £700,000, and we continued the town schemes which were then in force. There are 27 town schemes in force, and two are being 177 negotiated at the moment. The point at issue between us, so far as I can recall, was whether immediately to introduce legislation for a conservation grant. This is rather a different thing and our decision will be subject to the pilot projects being carried out in Bath, Chester, York and Chichester.
§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, can the noble Lord remind the House what was the amount of central Government and local government money committed for the year 1973/4 by the last Government on May 20, 1970?
§ LORD SANDFORDI think the noble Lord will probably remember that better than I can. But the proposal, which would have required legislation, and which we have not adopted without further investigation, was that the conservation grant, if and when it was introduced, would rise to about £11 million in 1973/4. The proposals we are making now are to increase the Historic Buildings Council grants to £1 million in this year.
§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, would the noble Lord endorse my memory: that it was to be £11 million central Government money and £12 million local government money, making £3 million annually, and that this was cancelled on January 1 of this year? And while it is very welcome to have a £300,000 increase in the central Government money, would the noble Lord join me in hoping that his colleagues may soon be able to restore the other nine-tenths of what they cut?
§ LORD SANDFORDMy Lords, I will gladly join with the noble Lord in seeking to find the best way of ensuring that our historic towns and historic buildings are safeguarded, preserved and, conserved. We could not have cancelled any of his conservation grants because it would have needed legislation to introduce them (it still will) and legislation had not been prepared, let alone introduced.
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (EARL JELLICOE)My Lords, may I, very deferentially, remind noble Lords that the purpose of Questions and supplementary questions is to elicit information?
§ LORD SHACKLETONMy Lords, the noble Earl, as Leader of the House, is completely right; but is he aware that the House is in a difficulty when Members of the Government Front Bench are unaware of facts that are known to some of the rest of the House?