Proceeding contribution from Lord St John of Fawsley (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 28 June 2005. It occurred during Question for short debate on Vauxhall Tower.
Vauxhall Tower
My Lords, I am sure that your Lordships are grateful to my noble friend Lord Baker of Dorking for having introduced this important subject at this moment—not only a timely moment; but as he said, a historic moment, because it is taking place before the dread planning decision is issued in its final form. However, I fear with him that it is unlikely to be deflected even by his eloquence, which we heard this evening. I was chairman of the Royal Fine Art Commission for 15 years. In those 15 years I had 15 different Secretaries of State. That had a great advantage because as soon as the reigning Secretary of State had mastered his brief he left and was required to go and pester someone else. That meant that one had a measure of de facto freedom that was most welcome. However, all the Secretaries of State, particularly my noble friend Lord Baker of Dorking, were extremely helpful and concerned with the aesthetic values that the Royal Fine Art Commission so coherently and courageously championed. I do not want to repeat my noble friend’s points, but skylines and views are crucial in this argument. They are crucial in this case and will remain crucial in the future. We need to raise our voices at every possible opportunity. The planners have learned nothing about views. Ministers have learned little; certainly the Ministers of the present Government. We still lack a coherent policy on high buildings. Eight years ago the Royal Fine Art Commission published a report on tall buildings in London. I will not ask the Minister whether he has read it; or perhaps I might. Or perhaps it has been kept from him by his civil servants. But this contains the basis of a policy of high buildings in London, which has been ignored by successive governments. Views are all-important in this city. I am glad to say that the Royal Fine Art Commission of the day—when the then Conservative Government headed by Harold Macmillan was desperately searching for dollars and was pressing for the erection of the Hilton hotel—was the one body that opposed it. If you look at that building today, you can see that it ruins the proportions of the whole of Mayfair, which had one of the finest townscapes in the world. Wherever you go in Mayfair, if you raise your eyes from pavement level and are lucky enough not to fall into a pothole, and look—
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 673 c199-200
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Construction Architecture Conservation areas Environment protection Greater London Flats Low incomes Planning permission Public inquiries Vauxhall River Thames World Heritage sites
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 09:53:55 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_254135
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_254135
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_254135