HC Deb 15 November 1973 vol 864 cc229-30W
Mr. Freeson

asked the hon. Member for Chelsea as Second Church Estates Commissioner whether the Church Commissioners will in future undertake to give local authorities first offer of redundant church sites for community purposes, in particular in areas of social stress suffering from shortage of land and inadequate public services and housing.

Mr. Bishop

I have been asked to reply.

The Church Commissioners are not in a position to give such an undertaking because they are required to have regard to the interests of the beneficiaries of sales of redundant church sites. These beneficiaries are the dioceses, for pastoral needs, and the Redundant Churches Fund established by law to assist with the preservation of redundant churches of historic or architectural interest vested in the fund. But, subject to the interests of their beneficiaries, they are certainly ready to consider offers received from local authorities.

Mr. Freeson

asked the hon. Member for Chelsea as Second Church Estates Commissioner, why the Church Commissioners were instructed to sell the redundant St. Laurence Church site in Kilburn to the highest bidder by tender instead of offering it by lease or sale at district valuer's price to the London borough of Brent for school or other community provision in a social stress and education priority area.

Mr. Bishop

I have been asked to reply.

In selling redundant church sites it is the Church Commissioners' duty to have regard to the interests of the beneficiaries of sale, namely, the dioceses, for pastoral needs and the Redundant Churches Fund established by law to assist with the preservation of redundant churches of historic or architectural interest vested in the fund.

Under a scheme confirmed by Order in Council under the Pastoral Measure 1968 the site of the redundant church of St. Laurence, Brondesbury, was vested in the Church Commissioners for sale. Despite public notice no representations were received against this scheme and the commissioners decided to offer the site for sale by tender. Whilst they were not bound to accept the highest tender received, they felt obliged in this case in the interests of their beneficiaries to accept the tender of the National Westminster Bank which exceeded that of the London borough of Brent by a substantial margin.

My hon. Friend has since been informed that the purchasers intend to build on the site a hostel for young members of their staff.

Forward to