The Palace of Westminster will be at risk of a Notre Dame-style fire or a similar catastrophic event if MPs do not tackle the issue of funding refurbishments, a parliamentary committee has said. Decisions about how and when to begin a full restoration of the building, which is Grade I-listed and a Unesco world heritage site, have been repeatedly delayed amid disagreement over how it should be done and spiralling costs. The cost of maintaining the estate will soon hit £2m a week, and a recent estimate found the work could cost as much as £40bn and potentially last for six decades.
The cross-party Commons public accounts committee (PAC) said urgent action was needed to avoid the risk of a major fire or similar disaster, and to staunch increasing costs, with every year of inaction adding an estimated £420m to the restoration programme. There has been a “political allergy” to making decisions, Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown, the Conservative MP who chairs the PAC, said. As well as the ever-increasing costs, he said, MPs should also “imagine the blow suffered by the UK’s morale and reputation of some kind of catastrophic failure”.
This has resulted in a maintenance bill of about £1.5m a week. The PAC report said that without action the figure was expected to reach £2m. The issue has been seen as a matter for MPs and peers for decide, rather than the government.
The PAC stressed that it was not its role to recommend a particular programme, but the report urges action and has made a series of recommendations for making the process work better. It says that in the next six months the clerks of the Commons and the Lords – who are nominally in charge of the process – should set out a plan to properly engage parliamentarians, something it says has so far been lacking. Other recommendations include a more robust set of cost estimates and a timetable to help a decision about the main project in 2030, as well as a more urgent approach to finalising temporary accommodation for both chambers while the works take place.
Calling the current governance of the scheme “far too complex”, it says it should be made easier, and a new restoration and renewal select committee formed, allowing MPs to hold senior officials to account. Four proposals for refurbishment, ranging from a nearly-full exit from the estate during the works to a version in which only the Lords would move, have been narrowed to two, from which MPs must choose. The first, a “full decant”, would involve staff moving to buildings on the north side of the estate, with the Commons being put in Richmond House, a nearby government building, and the Lords to the QEII conference centre.
The project would last up to 24 years and cost about £15.6bn. A “staged decant” would last anything from 38 to 61 years and involve the Commons moving to the Lords chamber for up to two years. That project would cost about £39.2bn.
Extract — continue reading at the source.
