PIER AND HARBOUR ORDER (BRIGHTON WEST PIER) CONFIRMATION BILL (Hansard, 26 June 1980)

§ Lord MOWBRAY and STOURTON
My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time. The purpose of the Bill is to confirm an order enabling the Brighton West Pier Society Limited to become the statutory undertakers for the West Pier.
The West Pier dates from 1865. It is thus one of the oldest piers in England and has been, perhaps, one of the most elegant; but in recent years, alas! it has fallen into disrepair, and it is now closed to the public. When its former owners went into liquidation, the pier vested in the Crown Estate Commissioners. The West Pier Society Limited hope and intend to take over the pier, with the object of restoring and operating it. To achieve these objects they need some of the statutory powers of the former under- 1806 takers, and have therefore promoted the order that is scheduled to this Bill.
The effect of the order is that, once the Crown Estate Commissioners have conveyed the pier to the West Pier Society Limited, that body—the Company, as they are called in the order—will take over the essential part of the former company's statutory powers and duties.
My Lords, it is a very considerable enterprise to be undertaken by a voluntary body. They are campaigning to gather the necessary funds and backing for their restoration plans. Their efforts and enthusiasm are quite crucial to the preservation of the pier. Nevertheless, the pier will only be conveyed to them when they have satisfied the Crown Estate Commissioners that their company has reached an adequately secure financial and statutory position. They will thus enter into their statutory rights and responsibilities only if they are in a position to discharge them properly. So, the actual transfer may not take place immediately. But the order and the Bill are essential to these rather complicated arrangements, which are themselves unavoidable if the Brighton West Pier Society Limited are to have any chance of saving the West Pier.
I hope that I have explained the scope of this Bill to your Lordships at sufficient length. My Lords, I commend the Bill to the House and I beg to move.

§ Lord ELWYN-JONES
My Lords, I hasten to say that we on this side of the House will support this Bill as a necessary step in what, I think, can only be described as the courageous effort by public-spirited people with a sense of our national heritage to save a valuable part of that heritage from demolition. The noble Lord has reminded the House that the pier was erected, in fact, between 1863 and 1866. My researches tell me that The Times of 1867 reported: panic among the promenaders on the pier when the structure shuddered and oscillated"— I like that word— several times. Ladies fainted"— as was their habit in those Victorian days— 1807 as the crowd hurried to the pier entrance". However, the pier stood firm and has stood firm for over a century. I think that it has been generally regarded as one of the finest piers in Great Britain and, therefore, something that it is essential to seek to save. It has provided pleasure to holiday makers and residents for over 100 years. Since it was built it has responded to social needs in an entertaining and an immensely decorative way, and was, and I think, is, a splendid example of what one might describe as "seaside oriental", with shapely structures and standard lamps in the embrace of music hall dragons—wonderful stuff!
It is very interesting that the concert hall on the pier was built in 1916, during the First World War, as a kind of morale booster when many of the wounded from the trenches were brought to Brighton to be healed. In the circumstances it was perhaps fitting that the pier should have been extensively used to make Joan Littlewood's brilliant film, "Oh what a lovely war"!
The sea end of the pier was closed in 1971 as being unsafe and the shore end was closed four years later. At one time demolition of the pier was being proposed and, indeed, planned, but happily that was prevented by an energetic "Save-the-Pier" campaign in Brighton. I have little doubt that not only do the majority of the people of Brighton want the pier saved, but a large number of the thousands of visitors who come to the town would want the same.
It is interesting that the Brighton Gazette conducted a poll on the question: "Do you want the West Pier to be saved, and would you be prepared to pay a penny rate for it?" Over 1000 people responded; over 70 per cent. of those said Yes, and only 6 per cent. said No. In this campaign the Brighton West Pier Society actively responded to that majority view of the community, with the support of the active Brighton Conservation Society. Therefore, in our view on this side of the House—and I understand that it is reflected on the other side of the House—every encouragement should be given to those who wish to save the West Pier. I am sure that the House, with its excellent track record in conservation matters, will take that view. Therefore, 1808 we hope that the result of this endeavour will be a success.
Incidentally, I hope that public interest in the matter will not fade in the sense of a willingness for some degree of commitment from public sources to help in the financial endeavour that lies ahead. But at any rate, as far as it goes, clearly this is a useful and necessary Bill to which we give our support.

§ Lord MOWBRAY and STOURTON
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Elwyn-Jones, for the way in which he has supported this Bill in his usual inimitable, light and witty style. "Seaside oriental" was not an expression that I had heard used about this particular pier, but on reflection I think that it is very apt, especially when one thinks that it might have been pupped from around the corner in the Pavilion.
I should like to mention, en passant, that the Brighton Town Council has very generously said that if the company is successful in its financial efforts to raise this money in a public spirited way—as the noble and learned Lord said—it, too, will contribute a considerable sum of money towards this fund.
I should be less than honest if I did not quickly pour cold water on the noble and learned Lord's, I think, only half-hearted hope that there might be public support from the Government. It would be misleading if I held out any prospect of that, however nice it might have been in better times. I wish the company luck in its endeavours and I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time.

§ Lord ELWYN-JONES
My Lords, the hopeful indication that the local authority might find it appropriate to support the endeavour from its sources, at any rate is gratifying. But I hope that the Government will take a kindly view if it takes that course, and not come down upon the company on the basis of this allegedly being a wasteful extravagance. This is an important matter, and I gather from the assurance of the Minister that that is not the view the Government would take.
On Question, Bill read 2^a and committed to a Committee on Unopposed Bills.

§ Lord LYELL
My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn during pleasure until 8.15 p.m.