§ 2.44 p.m.
§ LORD GARDINERMy 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 any proposals to make for the more economic use of the site now occupied by the Royal Courts of Justice; and in particular, whether the East Wing thereof should not be demolished and rebuilt so as to increase the courts and other legal offices which could be accommodated on the site.]
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORMy Lords, I am aware of the great interest which the noble and learned Lord, Lord Gardiner, took in the possibility of making more economic use of the site now occupied by the Royal Courts of Justice when he occupied the Woolsack. I do not think the noble and learned Lord ever contemplated redeveloping the whole site. The Royal Courts of Justice are in fact one of the principal architectural monuments of the Victorian age and the Gothic revival; but the East Wing, where the offices of the courts are for the most part situated, is uneconomically planned and in many respects unsuitable for present-day purposes. Plans for rebuilding the East Wing behind the front block on the Strand, and replacing it by a modern building comprising courts and offices, are under consideration as part of the Government's general forward building programme in London.
§ LORD GARDINERMy Lords, while thanking the noble and learned Lord for that Answer, may I ask him whether there is anything which now prevents the commencement of that work except money, and, if not, in what year in this Parliament he anticipates that we shall be able to start?
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORMy Lords, I am not sure that it is very easy to answer that question directly, because in the term "money" so much else has to be considered. There is the question of priority in Government office building, and the orderly development of a building plan. There is also the necessity of getting a suitable plan for the building, and a suitable allocation of a site. But I do not deny to the noble and learned Lord that the financial aspect of our plan of capital building in London must be taken into account with other considerations.
§ LORD SIMON OF GLAISDALEMy Lords, will the noble and learned Lord the Lord Chancellor bear in mind that to pull down the East Wing of the Law Courts would be to destroy the intricate mastery of a great architectural masterpiece? Will he rather consider internal reconstruction if more courts are required? Would he particularly consider building new courts off the East side of the Great Hall, as was done successfully off the West side under Lord Chancellor Kilmuir's administration?
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORMy Lords, I think that that supplementary question illustrates that there is more than just money involved. I certainly will take note of what the noble and learned Lord has put to me. I do not claim to be an architectural expert, and I shall leave the architecture to others because I am not an admirer of the architectural beauty of the Royal Courts of Justice; but I recognise that others are. I shall try to do my best conscientiously, and not to intrude my own prejudices in whatever needs to be done.
§ LORD GARDINERMy Lords, further to the last question, may I ask whether it is not the fact that the Ministry's plans provide for the rebuilding of the East Wing while retaining the Front—which it is understood Sir John Betjeman would never allow to be touched in any case?
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORMy Lords, I believe that this is so, but I do not know how far the plans will actually come out in practice. I am sure that the East Front is the thing which Sir John Betjeman would most deplore the loss of—and who am I to argue with him?