Houses of Parliament - repair, rebuild, decamp or relocate

[localzuk]

Just thought I'd find out what people's thoughts are on the Houses of Parliament and the needed repairs.

 

Some are calling for it to be done bit by bit, some for everyone to temporarily move elsewhere and fix it up in one go, and others calling for parliament just to be moved entirely to somewhere like Manchester or Birmingham, and for the building to be fixed up as a museum.

 

I'm a fan of moving parliament to Manchester personally, but practically it would cause some issues with things like ministers going to their ministries as they'd all still be in London. So, the "kick em all out and rebuild" seems best option overall.

[unixman_again]

Other - kick em out permanently, bulldoze the Palace of Westminster and use the site for affordable housing, run Parliament via teleconferencing thereby cutting traveling and accommodation costs, and making Parliament more green.

[localzuk]

Other - kick em out permanently, bulldoze the Palace of Westminster and use the site for affordable housing, run Parliament via teleconferencing thereby cutting traveling and accommodation costs, and making Parliament more green.

 

Not really practical - there is no substitute for face to face meetings. This page gives a brief explanation as to why - Video Conferencing versus face-to-face meetings: Is Video Conferencing a Good Substitute for Face-to-face Meetings? | Leading Virtually

 

Government needs to actually work in person with each other, regardless of whether you like them or not.

[3s-gtech]

Fix it up. It'd only be replaced by some hideous, steel, glass and chipboard 'architect designed' abomination with a flat roof that'd be rotten, leak and be unfit for purpose after 30 years. At least the Palace looks nice and draws tourists.

 

No problem with shifting the ministers out while work goes on to save costs though - MPs come and go, but old buildings can't be so easily replaced.

[witch]

Definitely kick em all out and redo in one go

Getting rid of the cheap members bars and posh dining rooms whilst they are at it

[Sagima]

What I think they should do is build some sort of high speed rail network in the north linking liverpool, manchester and leeds and have parliament rebuilt in manchester and fast train links to the cities where the ministries and other bits and pieces that make up the government of the uk could be relocated to (could probably leave the queen to do her own thing).

London could go and be just the financial and cultural center of the country and all the work running it could be done in less corrupt parts. (also nearer to those other countries that they manage)

[aleach2]

I think they should build a new sustainable parliament building (like Scotland) which if fit for purpose and suitable for the modern day parliament. They should still repair the Palace of Westminster and open it as a museum. They should still have all the pomp there like the opening of parliament with the queen etc.

[LeMarchand]

I think Guy Fawkes had a good idea about what to do.

 

*Realises that I have now put myself on the "Terrorist" watchlist*

[localzuk]

What I think they should do is build some sort of high speed rail network in the north linking liverpool, manchester and leeds and have parliament rebuilt in manchester and fast train links to the cities where the ministries and other bits and pieces that make up the government of the uk could be relocated to (could probably leave the queen to do her own thing).

London could go and be just the financial and cultural center of the country and all the work running it could be done in less corrupt parts. (also nearer to those other countries that they manage)

 

Moving the ministries would be impossible - you can't make everyone who works for them either move or redundant. You'd cripple the economy of London.

 

There are literally thousands of employees in those ministries. For example, 1500 in the Dept of Education, as an example. In total, there are over 400,000 civil servants, the majority of which work in London...

[JRowley]

I prefer the museum idea with a new parliament building, but failing that kicking them out and getting it done in a 5th the time is definitely preferable.

[Andrew_C]

I think maybe "Kick 'em out permanently." is an option we need.

[pcstru]

The problem is, if you kick them out, you will end up kicking them out to a building that is more fit for purpose (than the POW) and given the dilemma of preserving such a historical site vs mucking about with it to make it fit for purpose, it is unlikely ever to be as effective as a new facility. Personally, I'd favour mucking about with it but I suspect I'm in a small minority.

[mthomas08]

Other - kick em out permanently, bulldoze the Palace of Westminster and use the site for affordable housing, run Parliament via teleconferencing thereby cutting traveling and accommodation costs, and making Parliament more green.

 

In an ideal world it would work like a treat but with people who have zero clue about IT... no chance. Would cost more in training them than the actual equipment/system and they would end up with a personal Technician.. think of that poor soul.

 

Again it's doable and workable solution to cutting down the travel expenses but wouldn't happen.. don't expect politicians to be logical do you???

[JRowley]

The problem is, if you kick them out, you will end up kicking them out to a building that is more fit for purpose (than the POW) and given the dilemma of preserving such a historical site vs mucking about with it to make it fit for purpose, it is unlikely ever to be as effective as a new facility. Personally, I'd favour mucking about with it but I suspect I'm in a small minority.

 

Not a difficult sell to preserve that historical site as a museum/tourist attraction.

[jdoyle]

move them out to the Olympic village site......

[pcstru]

Not a difficult sell to preserve that historical site as a museum/tourist attraction.

I agree, it would be an easy sell - hence I suspect my view will be minority . (I think) my view is that it is the mother of parliaments and we should not be afraid to allow the architecture to incorporate both the functions and forms that that reflect 21st century reality. So probably knock it down and replace it with something that looks more like the MI6 building.

[synaesthesia]

I just want to know where the hell they got the repair figure from. I'm not imagining it will be cheap but BILLIONS?

[localzuk]

I just want to know where the hell they got the repair figure from. I'm not imagining it will be cheap but BILLIONS?

 

Don't underestimate just how large the building is, or how complex its engineering. It has 1100 rooms, 100 staircases and 3 miles of corridors...

[synaesthesia]

Still seems quite high - surely they could rebuild at that cost? (not a builder!)

[Andrew_C]

Just think what WE could charge them for a few under-spec PCs and a BT 5 Meg broad-band connection...

 

Hey, that's only £5.2m per room. Seems OK to me, after all, we're all in this together!!

Edited June 19, 2015 by Andrew_C

[localzuk]

Still seems quite high - surely they could rebuild at that cost? (not a builder!)

 

Rebuilding is quite simply not an option, its a grade 1 building and a world heritage site. It is the most visited tourist site in the UK.

 

Asbestos clearance alone will cost hundreds of millions. Its got structural issues (sinking into the Thames). It needs all cabling and plumbing ripping out entirely. It doesn't currently have a media centre to interview MPs etc... It is an almost entirely inaccessible building, so would need bringing up to code on that aspect.

 

The price estimates do sound like I'd expect to be honest. We got a quote for building a single classroom here recently, £1800 per m3 for a couple of walls, a roof and a floor. Didn't include any heating, wiring etc... Building work in London is a lot more expensive.

 

Think of it this way - the building has to be preserved, regardless of whether it remains parliament or not. It'll cost a heck of a lot of money even if it isn't fully refurbished. Tourists spend billions in London every year. If you got rid of one of the main attractions, that amount will drop.

Edited June 19, 2015 by localzuk

[SteveBentley]

However it's not fit for purpose, going to so basic a level as there only being space for 427 MPs to sit in the chamber, whereas there are 650 constituency seats.

[unixman_again]

Anything that involves government is a complete ripoff. A recent example is here in Brum. We're getting our very own "Boris Bikes" scheme and the 5,000 bikes are going to cost £24m. That's £4,800 per bike. 1,000 of these bikes are being given free to low income families to encourage them to exercise more. Surely for that money they could have given 12,000 families £400 vouchers for Hawk Cycles or similar and improved the life style of far more people? I'm just a lowly sysadmin who doesn't understand the complexities of government finance. Anyway, I'm keeping my eye on ebay for a £4,800 bike going at a bargain price

[rich_tech]

I think I would rather see a new purpose built building now myself and that existing site being used as a museum.

 

I imagine that there are many different office blocks and sites in London that could easily accommodate the chambers and their associated offices too if they looked hard enough.

 

Decorating is another massive hidden cost in that building thats probably overlooked, its not like they will be using any cheap £3 a roll wallpaper and cord carpets when rebuilt

[steve]

I'm for move em out permanently to a new facility that would work better for their needs. Convert the current facilities into hotel / museum / conference facilities.

 

One possability for the new location is a cruise ship, they could have a roaming parliment with onboard accomodation (no 2nd home allowance) and onboard catering (no meal allowances). Then when we've had enough, cut the mooring lines and set them adrift....