§ 3.14 p.m.
§ Lord Sefton of Garston asked Her Majesty's Government:
§ Whether they will not proceed with the relocation of staff from, and the demolition of,2 Marsham Street until the Comptroller and Auditor General has examined the consequences of both decisions.
§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of the Environment (Lord Strathclyde)My Lords, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Environment has yet to announce his decision on relocation. It will be based on value for money for the taxpayer. The Comptroller and Auditor General will audit the department's expenditure on relocation in due course and may subject it to a value-for-money scrutiny.
§ Lord Sefton of GarstonMy Lords, I thank the Minister very much for that Answer, but I am rather puzzled by the words "in due course". When one starts to talk about the demolition of a building which has been occupied for less than 20 years and which has been under the maintenance of the Property Services Agency, I would have thought that that would demand immediate examination. Perhaps I may suggest to the Minister that if it happened in local government some people would be talking about surcharging. The assurance that I want is that the Comptroller and Auditor General will look at the problem before any staff are moved. Like many others, I do not believe that it is necessary to pull this building down.
§ Lord StrathclydeMy Lords, the Comptroller and Auditor General is there to make sure that the taxpayers' money has been spent wisely once it has been spent. Before we made this decision, consultants, building engineers, accountants and various financial experts did of course give us the benefit of their advice. We are led to believe that the building that the 1343 Department of the Environment and the Department of Transport currently occupy does not have a very long-term life.
§ Lord Peyton of YeovilMy Lords, will the Minister bear in mind the fact that not even the Comptroller and Auditor General has the miraculous powers that would be required to cure that horrible building?
§ Lord StrathclydeMy Lords, I think that my noble friend is absolutely correct and I hope that the noble Lord, Lord Sefton of Garston, heard him clearly.
§ Lord MellishMy Lords, may we have a straight answer to the question about the staff of the Department of the Environment? I understand that they were originally moving to Canary Wharf, but that has since been both denied and reaffirmed in the press. Can we have it straight? Are they going or are they not?
§ Lord StrathclydeMy Lords, as I said in my original Answer, the decision has not yet been made. They may still go, or they may not.
§ Lord Taylor of GryfeMy Lords, will the Minister confirm that before a decision to distribute these civil servants elsewhere is taken, some consideration of regional policy will be introduced so that we might have a wider distribution of civil servants, rather than adding to the congestion and the costs of London?
§ Lord StrathclydeMy Lords, the desirability of spreading civil servants around the country is well understood by this Government. The noble Lord will be glad to know that over 40 per cent. of the staff of the Department of the Environment are based outside London. However, the particular civil servants referred to in the Question are needed to advise Ministers regularly, which is why they should be based within a reasonable distance of Westminster.
§ Lord McIntosh of HaringeyMy Lords, although I would certainly urge the demolition of 2 Marsham Street on aesthetic grounds, will the Minister confirm that it is the case, as reported in Building magazine, that the department has commissioned a six-week study of the cost of the refurbishment of 2 Marsham Street? If that is the case, will he publish the terms of reference, not merely in the general cause of open government, but because the Comptroller and Auditor General himself would wish to know the terms of reference and would wish to make them public?
§ Lord StrathclydeMy Lords, I cannot confirm that such a study has been commissioned, but I shall certainly find out. If the noble Lord will allow me to write to him about this, I shall certainly do so.
§ Lord TordoffMy Lords, has not the noble Lord just told us that all of these people are kept in Marsham Street so that he can answer questions like that?
§ Lord StrathclydeMy Lords, that simply shows that sometimes even all of those very skilled civil servants let me down.
§ Lord Sefton of GarstonMy Lords, I was amazed that the Minister should tell us that so many experts and consultants have looked at this matter because his own department has told me that only one—Arup Associates—has been consulted and that those consultants had recommended demolition. I do not know for certain—
§ Lord Sefton of GarstonMy Lords, noble Lords waste more time telling me to get to my point than I am taking. If the Minister is looking for somewhere to transfer his staff urgently, could I suggest that he looks—
§ Lord Sefton of GarstonMy Lords, may I ask the Minister whether he will look at the problem of the old County Hall and see whether he can move the staff there?
§ Lord StrathclydeMy Lords, as I have said, many people have been asked to look at this problem. Ove Arup is one and Coopers & Lybrand Deloitte is another. There are many potential solutions. We are still looking at them. As soon as the decision is made, we shall let the House know.
§ Lord MellishMy Lords, as the Minister is in a writing mood, will he be good enough to put me on his list as one of those who should receive a letter saying whether the staff will be transferred or not?
§ Lord StrathclydeMy Lords, when the decision is made, it will be put to the House.