---

Andrew Mackinlay: The right hon. Gentleman raises the question of Westminster Hall as did my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham. I want to say that I am very catholic about that question. I have an open mind, but now is not the time to resolve how it should be. In fact, the W Rooms are not part of Westminster Hall. I believe that they date from 1888. Even after Pugin and Barry had created the wonderful building joining the mediaeval Westminster Hall, there stood, next to the place where Oliver Cromwell now stands, some quite attractive courtrooms, which were demolished with the opening of the courts elsewhere in London. Then within the buttresses of Westminster Hall were placed the W Rooms, the IPU Room and the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association Room. They are not part of the mediaeval building, but recent add-ons in the great sweep of things. They are nevertheless attractive and fulfil a utility.

We are faced with a problem tonight because we are the custodians of important heritage buildings of which we are immensely proud at the same time as being a functioning democratic Parliament and legislature. That poses a great dilemma. I am pleased that the right hon. Member for East Yorkshire (Mr. Knight) mentioned the problem of space and reminded us that we will lose out from the proposals. We are rushing into things inappropriately without having a total development plan that combines and reflects all the constraints of heritage against utility.

Mr. Gale: The hon. Gentleman has done his research very well: the W Rooms were indeed an add-on. We are
 
11 May 2004 : Column 301
 
talking about visitor facilities. I want to mention three parliamentary bodies—the parliamentary armed forces scheme, the parliamentary police scheme and the industry and Parliament trust—that are all looking for accommodation within the parliamentary estate. If we are going down this road, surely priority should be given to those parliamentary bodies before we start sacrificing space in Westminster Hall.

Andrew Mackinlay: If it were within my gift—if the Almighty suddenly deigned that I was in charge of these affairs—that is the sort of thing that I would take into cognisance, but alas the Almighty is not going to do that. The hon. Gentleman provides another illustration of factors that need to be taken into account. They are not going to be so taken into account because on the pink forms tomorrow we are going to sign up to the motion; that is what will bounce us through. Many people will be there who have not trespassed into the Chamber this evening. That is why, as I have already said, we will win the debate tonight and lose the vote. It is wrong. Even now, I hope that the Deputy Leader of the House might give at least some undertaking about a further period of consultation for MPs before any final decision is taken. We must have the opportunity to have some further input.

My hon. Friend the Member for West Ham and other hon. Members have referred to the document's proposals for Westminster Hall. I take us on a virtual tour. At St. Stephen's Entrance there is going to be a new creation, which I believe is a mistake. It will be a pillbox—no doubt a nice pillbox done in Gothic style—which I do not believe should be situated there. I invite hon. Members to look at the black and white drawing in the document. Someone is at the pillbox to give information and advice, and some paragraphs refer to the additional costs, but I believe that the pillbox is unnecessary. Furthermore, it is not aesthetically appealing and would not gain planning permission if it came before Westminster city council. We should look at that proposal again.

If we go down the ramp, we go through security and into Westminster Hall. I ask the House to reflect on a particular point. One of the great attractions of Westminster Hall is the great door. Under the proposals, it will be permanently open—so not seen—and there will be a new glass construction put in its place. It is necessary, so we are told in the report, if large volumes of people are coming through. I view the effective removal of the door as an outrage. It is a profound mistake. The beauty of looking back down the Hall from the place where Charles I was tried lies in the wonderful door. It makes me cross: the door should stay there.

I disagree with my hon. Friend the Member for West Ham in his enthusiasm about how Westminster Hall should be used and what people should see if the proposal goes through tonight. I get an enormous thrill going through Westminster Hall—I know that other hon. Members do—because of its emptiness. It is the most wonderful, beautiful covered open space that exists in London. If we leave late at night when just the emergency lighting is on, it takes on a new beauty in its darkness. I want to preserve that, but the report talks
 
11 May 2004 : Column 302
 
about having new additional lighting. What a profound and foolish mistake that is—and what an outrage that it is in the report before us tonight.

Mr. Lepper: I have was impressed by the historical detail and research in the earlier part of my hon. Friend's speech this evening. However, does he agree—perhaps I am wrong—that the emptiness of Westminster Hall is, in view of the long history of that part of the parliamentary estate, a fairly recent phenomenon? For most of its existence, it has been thriving with a throng of people visiting this place. Among other things, it was once a market. I understand my hon. Friend's wish to preserve, but he may be trying to preserve a relatively recent part of the history of the Houses of Parliament.

Andrew Mackinlay: I do not sign up to that. The same point was uttered in the earlier part of our debate that took place on 22 April. Of course Samuel Pepys records the stalls and marketing activities that went on. That is a matter of fact. However, if we take the sweep of 1000 years of history, Westminster Hall has functioned mainly as a public hall. I cannot prove it, but I believe that for most of its life, it has been a place of utility for the state of the day. It has mainly fulfilled public functions. Occasionally, it has been used for other functions, but they have not been its main purpose. St. Mary Undercroft was used for stables during the Cromwellian period and as a rather nice Speaker's banqueting hall right up to 1834. However, its primary function was as a place of worship. To their credit, Pugin and Barry returned it to that purpose, and we are the beneficiaries. Westminster Hall has fulfilled various official, political and constitutional functions. That means it is often empty and uncluttered, as it is this afternoon. I do not want there to be more clutter in there.

My hon. Friend the Member for West Ham spoke about exhibitions in the Hall, a matter that is also covered in the report. It is a question of degree. If the motion is approved, I could live—albeit reluctantly—with occasional exhibitions using stands that are sensitive to the surroundings. However, I think that many hon. Members will have been concerned about two recent exhibitions.

About a year ago, the content of an exhibition about political cartoons was superb and compelling, but the structure used was inappropriate. The more recent exhibition of photographs was in place for a long time. I am all for photographic exhibitions, but that one was a dreadful blot on the landscape. It looked like a trade exhibition, and was wholly inappropriate for the guests who come here from all around the world. I urge the relevant Committees to be sensitive to this matter, in the immediate period and in the long term. Exhibitions in Westminster Hall should be held sparingly, and the stands used should be appropriate.

I have detained the House for some time, but I have been accepting interventions. I urge the Chairman of the Administration Committee, the hon. Member for Broxbourne (Mrs. Roe), and the Minister to reflect on what I have said. The mood of those hon. Members who have intervened indicates that there is a powerful case for some reflection on the proposals. I am sure that hon. Members could find a way to revisit some of these
 
11 May 2004 : Column 303
 
matters. We need greater consultation in respect of security aspects and the long-term ambitions for this wonderful building, in which we are privileged to live and work.

Mr. Gale: The hon. Gentleman has done the House a great service in illustrating the tensions between the title of the debate—"Visitor Facilities"—and the underlying security concerns that are of such great interest to us all. With that in mind, I beg to move, That the House sit in private.

Question put forthwith, pursuant to Standing Order No. 163 (motion to sit in private):—

The House divided: Ayes 9, Noes 184.

Division No. 169 [8:32 pm


AYES

Campbell, Gregory (E Lond'y)
Dodds, Nigel
Howarth, Gerald (Aldershot)
Leigh, Edward
Mackinlay, Andrew
Rosindell, Andrew
Spink, Bob (Castle Point)
Taylor, Sir Teddy
Thomas, Simon (Ceredigion)

Tellers for the Ayes:

Mr. Roger Gale and
Mr. Eric Forth


NOES

Abbott, Ms Diane
Adams, Irene (Paisley N)
Ainsworth, Bob (Cov'try NE)
Anderson, Janet (Rossendale & Darwen)
Atherton, Ms Candy
Atkins, Charlotte
Austin, John
Bailey, Adrian
Baker, Norman
Banks, Tony
Barnes, Harry
Begg, Miss Anne
Betts, Clive
Blackman, Liz
Borrow, David
Bradley, Peter (The Wrekin)
Brennan, Kevin
Brown, Russell (Dumfries)
Browne, Desmond
Bryant, Chris
Buck, Ms Karen
Burgon, Colin
Burnett, John
Burnham, Andy
Cairns, David
Casale, Roger
Clark, Paul (Gillingham)
Clarke, Tony (Northampton S)
Coaker, Vernon
Coffey, Ms Ann
Cohen, Harry
Coleman, Iain
Corston, Jean
Cranston, Ross
Crausby, David
Cryer, John (Hornchurch)
Cummings, John
Cunningham, Jim (Coventry S)
Cunningham, Tony (Workington)
Davidson, Ian
Dawson, Hilton
Dobson, rh Frank
Doughty, Sue
Dowd, Jim (Lewisham W)
Drew, David (Stroud)
Efford, Clive
Ellman, Mrs Louise
Field, Mark (Cities of London & Westminster)
Fisher, Mark
Fitzsimons, Mrs Lorna
Flook, Adrian
Flynn, Paul (Newport W)
Foster, Michael (Worcester)
Foster, Michael Jabez (Hastings & Rye)
Francis, Dr. Hywel
Gapes, Mike (Ilford S)
George, Andrew (St. Ives)
George, rh Bruce (Walsall S)
Gerrard, Neil
Gibson, Dr. Ian
Gilroy, Linda
Gray, James (N Wilts)
Green, Matthew (Ludlow)
Griffiths, Jane (Reading E)
Griffiths, Win (Bridgend)
Hamilton, David (Midlothian)
Hanson, David
Harris, Dr. Evan (Oxford W & Abingdon)
Harris, Tom (Glasgow Cathcart)
Harvey, Nick
Hayes, John (S Holland)
Heald, Oliver
Healey, John
Henderson, Ivan (Harwich)
Hendrick, Mark
Heppell, John
Hermon, Lady
Hill, Keith (Streatham)
Hinchliffe, David
Hogg, rh Douglas
Howarth, George (Knowsley N & Sefton E)
Hoyle, Lindsay
Hughes, Kevin (Doncaster N)
Hutton, rh John
Irranca-Davies, Huw
Jones, Jon Owen (Cardiff C)
Jones, Kevan (N Durham)
Jones, Lynne (Selly Oak)
Jones, Martyn (Clwyd S)
Keen, Ann (Brentford)
Kemp, Fraser
Kennedy, Jane (Wavertree)
Kidney, David
Kilfoyle, Peter
King, Andy (Rugby)
Knight, rh Greg (E Yorkshire)
Knight, Jim (S Dorset)
Kumar, Dr. Ashok
Ladyman, Dr. Stephen
Lansley, Andrew
Lawrence, Mrs Jackie
Laxton, Bob (Derby N)
Lepper, David
Levitt, Tom (High Peak)
Lewis, Ivan (Bury S)
Liddell, rh Mrs Helen
Liddell-Grainger, Ian
Linton, Martin
Love, Andrew
Lucas, Ian (Wrexham)
Luff, Peter (M-Worcs)
Luke, Iain (Dundee E)
McAvoy, Thomas
McCabe, Stephen
McCafferty, Chris
McDonagh, Siobhain
McGuire, Mrs Anne
McIntosh, Miss Anne
McIsaac, Shona
McKenna, Rosemary
McNulty, Tony
McWalter, Tony
Mahon, Mrs Alice
Mallaber, Judy
Mann, John (Bassetlaw)
Marsden, Paul (Shrewsbury & Atcham)
Meale, Alan (Mansfield)
Michael, rh Alun
Miller, Andrew
Mole, Chris
Moran, Margaret
Morgan, Julie
Mountford, Kali
Munn, Ms Meg
Murphy, Jim (Eastwood)
Murrison, Dr. Andrew
Naysmith, Dr. Doug
Owen, Albert
Perham, Linda
Pickthall, Colin
Plaskitt, James
Pound, Stephen
Prentice, Ms Bridget (Lewisham E)
Purnell, James
Rapson, Syd (Portsmouth N)
Redwood, rh John
Rendel, David
Robertson, Laurence (Tewk'b'ry)
Roe, Mrs Marion
Rooney, Terry
Roy, Frank (Motherwell)
Ruane, Chris
Salmond, Alex
Salter, Martin
Sanders, Adrian
Selous, Andrew
Shaw, Jonathan
Skinner, Dennis
Smith, Sir Robert (W Ab'd'ns & Kincardine)
Starkey, Dr. Phyllis
Steen, Anthony
Stringer, Graham
Stunell, Andrew
Taylor, rh Ann (Dewsbury)
Taylor, John (Solihull)
Taylor, Dr. Richard (Wyre F)
Teather, Sarah
Thomas, Gareth (Harrow W)
Tipping, Paddy
Turner, Dennis (Wolverh'ton SE)
Twigg, Derek (Halton)
Twigg, Stephen (Enfield)
Tyler, Paul (N Cornwall)
Vis, Dr. Rudi
Ward, Claire
Watson, Tom (W Bromwich E)
Webb, Steve (Northavon)
Whitehead, Dr. Alan
Whittingdale, John
Williams, Betty (Conwy)
Willis, Phil
Woolas, Phil
Wright, Anthony D. (Gt Yarmouth)
Wright, David (Telford)

Tellers for the Noes:

Mr. Nick Ainger and
Gillian Merron


Question accordingly negatived.

 
11 May 2004 : Column 304
 

8.43 pm

---