There is a “real risk” that the Palace of Westminster building will be destroyed by a “catastrophic” event before it is fully restored.
That was one of the conclusions in a report by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) published this week.
The Committee said that despite the broad consensus on the “critical need” to repair and restore the Palace of Westminster, progress “has been painfully slow” with “years of procrastination”. Many decisions taken in parliament were also being reopened and overturned.
PAC added that it is “incredible” that five years after parliament voted to renew the Palace of Westminster and its facilities, questions remain about the time frame, costs and how the works will be undertaken.
Parliament is spending up to £2 million a week patching up the Palace. But there is a growing list of health and safety incidents, including some involving asbestos.
The full restoration and renewal of the building is expected to cost £4bn and run until the early 2030s. However, the National Audit Office warned that such a complex project must incorporate lessons from other major works to avoid running behind schedule and over budget.
Committee calls on ‘urgent’ improvements
PAC chair, Dame Meg Hillier, said: “After years of procrastination and debate, resolutions of the House overturned and the exploding costs we saw in restoring just the Elizabeth Tower, it is difficult to have confidence in the future of the project to repair and restore this iconic World Heritage Site that thousands of people work in and visit every day.
“But without Parliament and the public having that confidence these critical works will continue to stall, with the real risk that the whole building will be destroyed by a catastrophic incident before the work is done, or perhaps even begun.
“There are already people on decades-long risk watchlists after being exposed to asbestos in the building – a building that’s leaking, dropping masonry and at constant risk of fire.
“Given the uncertainties over how the clerks will manage their legal responsibilities, who will really be held responsible and accountable if the unthinkable happens? In response to this report the PAC expects a lot more clarity on those critical issues and, finally, a clear indication of the cost and timeline for getting this massive job done before it becomes too late to do so.”
The Committee also highlighted the need to “urgently improve” timely transparency and compliance with health and safety protocols, particularly around asbestos, “before more significant works and potentially more serious incidents occur”.
Responding to the PAC report, a UK Parliament spokesperson said: “We are already getting on with work across the parliamentary estate to ensure the safety of those who work and visit here, and to support the continued business of Parliament. This includes planning for the large and complex restoration of the Palace of Westminster to preserve it for future generations.
“Last year members of both houses agreed a more integrated approach to restoration, prioritising safety critical work. The Restoration and Renewal Programme Board is shortlisting options for the restoration and members in both houses are expected to vote on the way forward later this year.”
Comments
Comments are closed.
Its about time Parliament realised that a simple new build outside London (Midlands or elsewhere) would prove far cheaper in the short and long term. Costs are going to spiral and completion dates will move for ever.
London is our capital. Do other countries locate their parliaments (or equivalent) hundreds of miles away?
We have this iconic building in London. No matter what happens it is incumbent on the current generations to preserve it.
As a senior construction and management professional who has worked around the world for a few decades I still find it inconceivable, with the supposed levels of expertise that exist, that apparent ineptitude still dominates. Returning to the UK after many years away I am constantly struck by the appalling management, inefficiencies, the lack of thinking, planning and care, especially in the Public Sector (phrases like Client self management stick out) – or is there something else going on?
The building exceeds 900 years of history, the very thought of restoring such building with all the details, pride and importance is not an easy task to undertake. From procurement of the trades, material and the unforseen areas which have not been touched for centuries makes it a extremely difficult undertaken. They mention asbestos, once this is disturbed then the areas now need to be closed off and further samples taken. This again add more delays. Imagine 10 areas to be tested per week. Results could take another week to arrive then the cycle start over again. New Rams etc. Addressing low morale, skill shortage, specialist skill shortage and bureaucracy another three constraints. Areas still being used whilst projects being carried out, planning for the unknown and unforeseen etc. Many constraints. In a nutshell, It is not an easy. We hope they can use lessons learnt and carry out work in small segments until final decisions are made. More importantly know when to draw the line. But the building is our political pride and joy and we need it to survive the test of time. 95% of us will not notice any difference but the work must go on.