the mother of all parliaments
Leaky, decaying and riddled with poisonous substances, the Palace of Westminster is in as poor condition as many of its corrupt inhabitants and is undeniably in desperate need of restoration. And it’s not only the building itself but the vast network of pipes, cables and data-services provision that are the real problem. But, with an estimated post-Covid/post-austerity cost exceeding £6bn (and rising), the question should be whether or not it’s the most suitable place for the nation’s debating chamber to be? Is the mother of all Parliaments actually fit for purpose?
Since King Cnut’s reign (1016-35) there has been a palace on the present site. In 1099, Westminster Hall, the oldest existing part of the structure was built by William II and has subsequently hosted the deposition of Richard II and the trials of William Wallace (aka Mel Gibson), Sir Thomas More, Guy Fawkes and Charles I. The Palace became Parliament’s permanent home in 1512 and has remained thus, apart from when several fires have resulted in the closure of the building, including in 1941 when a German incendiary bomb destroyed the Commons Chamber.
The Government’s auditing pal, Deloitte, undertook the detailed (and well-remunerated) survey necessary and presented three options. Option one was a series of rolling repairs, carried out while MPs and Lords continued their work. This, it found would take 32 years. Option two, a partial temporary decant to Westminster Hall and various other offices throughout the UK, would take eleven years. Option three, the full decant and relocation would have the Palace fully vacated for a period of around six years. This was the recommended option and the one that was selected, provided an exact replica of the House of Commons chamber was also constructed in nearby Richmond House. WTF. Also, it’s worth noting that according to the NAO, Parliament has spent more than £369m on maintenance since 2016 and estimates the current backlog of repairs stands at over £1bn.
Whilst we are all undeniably in thrall to the pomp and circumstance, to the spectacle and theatre, of the confrontational nature of politics and PMQs that the Chamber encourages, is this style best suited to the future, to serving our future? I can’t help thinking that when I see the devolved country’s swanky, new-fangled and tech-enabled homes of Holyrood, Stormont and The Senedd, and the EU’s dual homes of Strasbourg and Brussels, as being far more up to the task of informed, modern, mature debate, encompassing the provision of big data and secure cyber information, and of future electronic voting. My, they may even have included the services and support necessary for MPs and officials to take their babies and offspring into the office when necessary!
As a symbol of our long term democracy yes, let’s by all means renovate the fabric of the Palace of Westminster, tout suite, but as the future home of our Parliament its relevance and viability has long since…er, left the building.
PS Notwithstanding all of the above, more of the electorate’s attention is currently being taken up by attempting to discern exactly how much their MPs are worth? A salary of £82k a year, three times the national average, plus generous expenses that allow them to run a second home in our capital (even if they already live there and represent a London constituency), appears not enough. More than a quarter of Tory MPs take up second (and third) jobs including Theresa May’s Attorney General, Geoffrey Cox, who has raked in at least £6,000,000.00 whilst serving as an MP.
The current payment system is more than adequate and, if it isn’t, those individuals are best served doing other things. All second jobs, not purely ‘consultants, advisors and lobbyists’, should be banned. If an MP finds sufficient time for such an endeavour then they are clearly not devoting enough time to constituency work. The spurious ‘real life’ argument is disingenuous and pure hokum but if an MP genuinely wants to spend two or three weeks outside of Westminster let them do so, shadowing full-time workers for minimum wage. Call me a cynic but I suspect not many would take-up my offer…
