Jacob Rees-Mogg has blown a massive hole in plans for the renovation of parliament, telling MPs they may have to meet virtually on a lockdown-style video link while the Palace of Westminster is closed for works which are expected to last six years or more.
The Leader of the Commons said that a £1.5bn scheme to house parliament’s two chambers elsewhere in Westminster, set out in a report today, were “for the birds”.
His comments came after Boris Johnson was accused of sending the project “back to square one” by suggesting last year that MPs could instead move to a temporary home in York.
Today’s report by the Restoration and Renewal Programme team found that moving MPs into a temporary chamber in Richmond House on Whitehall and peers to the nearby QEII conference centre remains “the most secure, cost effective and practical solution” to keep parliament in operation while works take place.
It set out proposals to phase restoration work to minimise the time MPs are away from their historic home – including by creating a dry dock in the Thames alongside the Palace of Westminster to provide access for construction workers to the building from the river.
But it rejected proposals for MPs to remain in place while works go on around them, and said that even if the project is accelerated they will have to be away from their historic home for “years not months”.
Restoring the building while all MPs and peers remain on-site would cost billions of pounds more and take decades longer than temporarily moving out while work takes place, the report found.
But Mr Rees-Mogg said the proposal to move to temporary facilities in Westminster was not “sensible” at a time when the country’s finances are stretched by the Covid pandemic. He suggested that proceedings could continue in the historic chamber during the renovation works on a similar “hybrid” basis to lockdown arrangements, which have seen some MPs physically present, but most taking part by video link.
He told the Commons: “The proposal for Richmond House and for the Queen Elizabeth Centre was that there would be about £1.5bn of expenditure on temporary chambers. This can’t have been a sensible thing to do, even in less straitened financial times. In current circumstances, it seems to me to be for the birds.
“We have to focus on value for money. I am not the greatest advocate of hybrid proceedings – they’re better than nothing but they’re not as good as real, physical participation in debate – but I’d rather have hybrid proceedings for a little bit where we couldn’t use this chamber than spend £1.5 billion.
“We as Members of Parliament have a responsibility to our constituents, when their money is being spent, to accept while great restorations are taking place, we may have to put up with a little bit of discomfort, there may be occasionally a little bit of banging and noise being made, we can’t be too fussy about that if we’re to keep this as a working operational building.
“But the key work needs to be done and needs to be done in a timely fashion with value for money at its heart.”
Today’s report did not put a budget on the cost of works, currently expected to start in the mid-2020s.
But previous studies have put the price tag at anything between £3.5bn and £5.7bn – with one spending watchdog estimating that the eventual cost could be as much as £12bn.
It warned that delay in starting work would add to the cost, due to the ongoing bills for maintaining the elderly building.
“The 150-year-old building is falling apart faster than it can be fixed, with the cost of maintenance projects and ongoing works recently doubling in just three years to £127m a year in 2018/9,” said the report.
Unions representing parliamentary staff have opposed MPs’ calls to remain in the Palace while work goes on around them.
Prospect union deputy general secretary Garry Graham said: “The idea that parliament could be fully restored without evacuating MPs and staff was always a ridiculous obsession of a minority of politicians.
“We welcome the conclusion of this review that this option would pose an ‘extraordinary level of risk’ and hope that this bad idea can now finally be put to bed, after a large amount of time and public money has been wasted pursuing it.
“The risks of a potentially catastrophic incident at Parliament will continue to rise if this vital restoration work does not commence as soon as possible.”
The review found that the project will create thousands of jobs and apprenticeships across the UK, including inhigh-tech industries such as digital design and engineering, as well as traditional crafts including carpentry and stonemasonry.
The chief executive of the Restoration and Renewal Sponsor Body, Sarah Johnson, said: “The iconic home of Parliament is in urgent need of restoration. The review has found new ways of carrying out the complex project, focused on getting value for money, and we will continue preparing a detailed and costed restoration and renewal plan that will for the first time give Parliament a true sense of the costs and timescales of restoring the Palace of Westminster.”
Restoration and Renewal Delivery Authority chief executive David Goldstone added: “We are absolutely committed to getting on with the job, making sure we spend money effectively, focusing on the vital and essential work that needs doing to protect and restore the world-famous Palace of Westminster while supporting thousands of jobs nationwide.”
After the review was accepted by both Houses of Parliament, a detailed plan and costing for works will now continue, involving 100 investigative surveys of the building’s 1,100 rooms
