§ 2.43 p.m.
§ The Viscount of Falkland asked Her Majesty's Government:
§ What factors influenced their decision to intervene and prevent the transfer of the London Gay and Lesbian Centre from the London Residuary Body to the borough of Islington.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment (Lord Hesketh)My Lords, the principal factor to be taken into account when my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Environment determines an application is the interest of the chargepayers in the cost-effective and efficient discharge of the functions of the applicant authority. In the case of the London Residuary Body, its interest extends to London's chargepayers as a whole through the distribution of capital receipts.
The Viscount of FalklandMy Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that Answer. However, does he agree with me that this has been a conspicuously successful example of public funding of a body which has made itself self-sufficient over the years? Does it not seem rather strange that that body should have been singled out for the treatment that it received from the department, particularly in view of the strong social role that it plays in counselling and giving advice to an increasingly threatened minority group?
§ Lord HeskethMy Lords, under Section 123(2) consent is normally refused unless it can be shown that it will be in the interests of the chargepayers of the disposing authority. Each case that comes before 596 the Secretary of State under Section 123(2) is judged on its own merits.
§ Lord RentonMy Lords, do gays and lesbians mix freely together at the centre and how much does it cost the public?
§ Lord HeskethMy Lords, if one looks at the name of the centre, one sees that various groups attend it. However, the interest here is with regard not to the cost of the operation on a revenue basis but with regard to the property itself, which is held by the LRB.
§ Lord TordoffMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the centre has done valuable work in counselling people during the epidemic of AIDS which has spread through the community and that it is a matter not of frivolity but of serious concern that the organisation has been singled out, as my noble friend said, for special treatment?
§ Lord HeskethMy Lords, the lease that is effective at the moment lasts until August 1992. It is not within the LRB's remit to deal with the matters of policy to which the noble Lord referred.
§ Lord StallardMy Lords, will the noble Lord tell us what are the immediate to medium-term commercial and planning development interests in that area and how much they have influenced the decision?
§ Lord HeskethMy Lords, in the current property market, I would say that it was a fluctuating figure.
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyMy Lords, in view of the response which the Minister gave to an earlier question, is it not extraordinary that this is the only one of the 7,000 properties which the LRB inherited from the GLC to be treated in the manner that has been described? Is it not extraordinary that the centre, being in need, tries to raise the money to buy the property, is refused and it is then decided that the property is not to be transferred on the grounds that the centre can raise a commercial rent? If that is not discrimination, what is?
§ Lord HeskethMy Lords, the noble Lord, Lord McIntosh, as always makes a forceful case. However, it is important to realise that although the figure of 7,000 is accurate with regard to the total stock held or managed by the London Residuary Body, the important issue here is Section 123 of the Act. That has applied to only six properties; this is the seventh.
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyMy Lords, for which of the other six properties has disposal been refused?
§ Lord HeskethMy Lords, if a property is considered significant enough to come under the terms of Section 123 and must go before the Secretary of State it must be judged in each and every case on its merits. The first six properties were considered to have those merits. On the seventh, with regard to the matters to which I referred earlier concerning the prospects for the relationship to the chargepayers, the merits did not appear the same.
The Viscount of FalklandMy Lords, perhaps I may ask the Minister to give me a straight answer; no pun is intended. In the exchanges between the department, the local authority and the gay centre, the department mentioned the word "unacceptable" with regard to the level of subsidy, as it was described. What was unacceptable: the level of subsidy or the use of the building?
§ Lord HeskethMy Lords, I think I am correct in saying that if the word "unacceptable" has been used in the context to which the noble Viscount referred, it refers to the level of subsidy.