§ 3.3 p.m.
§ LORD SWAYTHLINGMy 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 why the Secretary of State for the Environment refused planning permission for the London International Exhibition Centre at Northolt, in view of the overwhelming evidence at the public inquiry and the urgent national need for modern exhibition facilities in the London area, and his written confirmation that this need was accepted by him and by the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry.
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, I believe that is the case. 1657 than read part of the decision letter in which the Secretary of State for the Environment gave his reasons for accepting the Inspector's recommendation to refuse permission for the proposed centre. After detailed comment on the Inspector's conclusions regarding the Northolt site the letter says this:
The Secretary of State accepts the opinion of the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry that there is indeed a need for better exhibition facilities in London. He does not however consider that it has been established that the need must be satisfied by the erection of an exhibition centre in this particular location and he has reached the conclusion that the need for better exhibition facilities is not such as to justify overriding the very great Green Belt, highway and general environmental objections which obtain in connection with the application site".Copies of the decision letter and the Inspector's report have been placed in the Library.
§ LORD SWAYTHLINGMy Lords, I thank the noble Lord for his reply. Does he not agree that this need, as recognised by the two Ministers, is so urgent as to overrule all the objections to the Northolt site, especially in view of the fact that no other site of the necessary size, location and road and rail access appears to be available? Following the extensive study made by the Greater London Council of 47 alternative sites, the Council selected this site as being the best by far for the purpose.
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, my right honourable friend is not aware that there are no other possible sites. As other sites are found, he will consider them. There are other sites which might become available. The present Greater London Council does not agree with the last Greater London Council on this matter, as the noble Lord knows. Further, the London Borough of Hilling-don and all the three Parliamentary candidates of the three Parties at the Uxbridge by-election supported the Secretary of State's view in this.
§ LORD DAVIES OF LEEKMy Lords, without much knowledge on this subject, may I ask the noble Lord why we must always take London as a centre? Why not Birmingham and Manchester, with Inter-City trains?
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, it so happens that a very great 1658 exhibition site is being built at Birmingham at the moment for which the Government are providing funds towards its construction.
§ LORD SWAYTHLINGMy Lords, would not the noble Lord agree that the majority of the proposed users of this exhibition site has said that it must be in London? London is the only important capital that has no exhibition site.
§ LORD MOWBRAY AND STOURTONMy Lords, I repeat that we completely accept that it would be a good thing to, have an exhibition site in London.