§ Lord PANNELLMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the first Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government, in view of their decision to abandon the new Parliamentary Building, what other proposals they have for using the site and whether further consideration, possibly through another inquiry, is to be given to the future of the Bridge Street, Richmond Terrace and Broad Sanctuary sites.
§ The PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY of STATE, DEPARTMENT of the ENVIRONMENT (Baroness Birk)My Lords, on Bridge Street, my right honourable friend the Lord President, in his Statement of 16th July in another place, suggested that in present circumstances the best way of providing additional accommodation for Members of Parliament would be the adaptation of existing buildings on the Parliamentary Building site, and undertook that the Government would submit proposals to the Services Committee.
On Richmond Terrace, I announced in reply to a Question from my noble friend on 4th March that we had decided the facades should be preserved; and a feasibility study is currently being carried out into the best way of providing office accommodation within them. The study will also consider the relationship of this development to options for the future development of the area between Richmond Terrace and the Parliamentary Building site. As to Broad Sanctuary, the Government recognise the importance of this inique site and are currently considering its future. Eventual decisions on all these sites will, of course, have to take account of the prevailing economic situation. We have no proposals for another inquiry.
§ Lord PANNELLMy Lords, is my noble friend aware, in view of the history of the development of the Whitehall area, that I consider her Answer a rather dusty one? The history of this site—
§ Lord PANNELLMy Lords, is my noble friend aware that in the history of 1012 this site opportunities were missed as far back as 1945 in regard to Broad Sanctuary and the Abercrombie plan? There was a plan issued in 1964—
§ Lord PANNELLI am still in an interrogatory frame of mind, my Lords. Is my noble friend aware that the Martin plan was commissioned by Mr. Geoffrey Rippon in 1963 and I was called on to implement it in 1964? So in view of bitter experience, I hope your Lordships will grant me some indulgence.
§ Lord PANNELLIn that case, my Lords, may I ask whether my noble friend is aware that the whole history is one of missed opportunities and bungled undertakings and that the House of Commons—
§ Lord PANNELLIs my noble friend aware that the House of Commons—
§ The LORD PRIVY SEAL (Lord Shepherd)My Lords, I hope my noble friend will appreciate that he has gone a little beyond the indulgence of your Lordships' House. Therefore, I hope he will put his supplementary question in a short way, bearing in mind that approximately 30 Members of this House wish to take part in the debate which follows.
§ Lord PANNELLMy Lords, I do not trouble your Lordships' House overmuch and I usually speak about things within my knowledge—
§ Lord PANNELLMy Lords, may I therefore ask the Minister whether the Government will consider setting up another inquiry, because, although a week may be a long time in politics, planning for the capital city needs a rather longer view?
§ Baroness BIRKMy Lords, my noble friend asked a number of questions. I appreciate his concern, and that of all past Ministers of Works. Perhaps it is a good thing we no longer have a Ministry of Public Building and Works, because, directly one Minister makes a plan, out 1013 go the Government and in comes another Minister with another plan. As for the Buchanan-Martin Report, on which my noble friend rests the burden of his protest and case, he is surely aware that in 1966, a month after he ceased to be in office—I imagine he must have known about it and agreed to it—a further inquiry was set up under the late Sir Robert Matthew and this recommended, against the Buchanan-Martin Plan, that there should not be a complete clearance. Indeed, the feeling now is that if the plan by which my noble friend sticks so loyally and nostalgically had been carried out, we should have had a complete mess in the middle of the Whitehall area.
§ Lord PANNELLOn the contrary, my Lords; we have the mess now.
§ 2.49 p.m
§ Lord PANNELLMy Lords, I beg leave to ask the second Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
§ The Question was as follows:
§ To ask Her Majesty's Government
- (a)what is the cost to date for work on the abandoned Parliamentary building and what is the figure of compensation to the architects and
- (b)how much has been spent on the Norman Shaw (North) Building to adapt it for the use of Members of Parliament.
§ Baroness BIRKMy Lords, I will inform my noble friend of the amount of compensation to be paid and of any other charges as soon as negotiations with the architects have been completed. The total commitment to date on the conversion of the Norman Shaw (North) building is £2,883,832.
§ Lord PANNELLMy Lords, is not this an example of spending money in dribs and drabs rather than going in for long-term planning; and is it not a fact that any noble Lord going along Bridge Street will see a lot of scaffolding and a slum that was earmarked years ago for a more noble building? Is my noble friend further aware that, though I appreciate her great enthusiasm for the job in hand, this is an extremely bitter experience for Members on both sides to live 1014 through and to see all the opportunities being lost?
§ Baroness BIRKMy Lords, I appreciate the way my noble friend feels, but I would point out that we are in a very grave economic crisis and that the decision on the buildings taken in another place was made entirely on the question of cost and economy.
§ Lord PARGITERMy Lords, could my noble friend tell me whether we are to have a survey of cost effectiveness to see what all these expensive buildings are worth in terms of manpower and per head?
§ Baroness BIRKMy Lords, we are not having any further inquiries. We have had so many inquiries on all this that it is quite possible to pick out any figures which are needed. If my noble friend wants anything further perhaps he will be good enough to write to me about it.
§ Lord PANNELLMy Lords, could we have an assurance that the sites will not be sold to private developers?
§ Baroness BIRKYes, my Lords. At the moment there is simply no chance of the sites being sold to private developers. It is a question of how to use them in the best way, bearing in mind, as my noble friend reminded us, the question of cost effectiveness.