Letter: Fortress Downing Street and the need for open spaces in the capital

Sir: Your front-page article and summary of the Whitehall correspondence about the proposal to remove parked cars from Horse Guards Parade ('Major keeps Sir Humphrey happy', 'Mandarins say No Minister to traffic ban'; 2 June) was unsettlingly inaccurate.

In the case of John Gummer, you reported that he deplored the idea of closing Horse Guards Road to traffic 'for a reason which would have made Sir Humphrey proud - the road is much used by Cabinet Ministers'. In fact, a fair reading of his letter would be that he had two grounds for opposition.

First, he did not believe that the road was so heavily used by traffic that pedestrian access was unduly difficult. Second, the road provided a valuable release for traffic when either Parliament Square or Trafalgar Square was congested and its loss would increase the backing up of traffic in Bird Cage Walk, The Mall and Whitehall. It was in the context of the latter reason that he pointed out that the road was 'much used by Ministers and others moving between SW1 and W1'.

In the case of the Prime Minister's principal private secretary, your assertion that the letter 'sharply ticks off the Permanent Secretary at the Department of National Heritage' is an interpretation to which you are entitled. However, you represent the private secretary's contribution to the debate as being only that removing cars would lead to an undesirable 'fortress Downing Street' situation.

In fact he did not say that it 'would' lead to such a situation, but that to close the road and ban car parking would 'notwithstanding any amenity justification inevitably lead to speculation that this was really part of a plan aimed at creating a fortress Downing Street.'

On balance, I would support the proposal to ban parking on Horse Guards Parade, but it does seem to me that opponents of the plan should have their arguments represented fairly.

Yours sincerely,

OWEN WARNOCK

Norwich, Norfolk

2 June