Crumbling Westminster = £3bn +. What should we do ? Poll..
Poll: Crumbling Westminster = £3bn +. What should we do ? Poll..
Total Members Polled: 470
Discussion
I'll add that I agree it's an Iconic Building and should be saved - and there's not point in turning it into a museum as they will not be able to afford the upkeep.....
The only reason it needs £3 Billion spending is that the maintenance work has not been on-going as required - and this is what happens. There's no way anyone else realistically will be able to afford to refurbish and run a business, so let's do the work, stick with it and maintain it.
I would not like to be trying to come up with a project plan to minimise disturbance having said that.
The only reason it needs £3 Billion spending is that the maintenance work has not been on-going as required - and this is what happens. There's no way anyone else realistically will be able to afford to refurbish and run a business, so let's do the work, stick with it and maintain it.
I would not like to be trying to come up with a project plan to minimise disturbance having said that.
Dog Star said:
3 billion?
Not perhaps a fair comparison, but just to put that amount of money into perspective....
This cost 1.5 billion DOLLARS!
But you can't compare the twoNot perhaps a fair comparison, but just to put that amount of money into perspective....
This cost 1.5 billion DOLLARS!
As that was built in backward country which is rife with corruption and inefficiency
Which is why they have such poor value for money
i think
surveyor said:
I'll add that I agree it's an Iconic Building and should be saved - and there's not point in turning it into a museum as they will not be able to afford the upkeep.....
The only reason it needs £3 Billion spending is that the maintenance work has not been on-going as required - and this is what happens. There's no way anyone else realistically will be able to afford to refurbish and run a business, so let's do the work, stick with it and maintain it.
I would not like to be trying to come up with a project plan to minimise disturbance having said that.
+1The only reason it needs £3 Billion spending is that the maintenance work has not been on-going as required - and this is what happens. There's no way anyone else realistically will be able to afford to refurbish and run a business, so let's do the work, stick with it and maintain it.
I would not like to be trying to come up with a project plan to minimise disturbance having said that.
Just to add, that it should be restored in all its glory and be the home to any future parliament in its rightful place; our capital city. £3 billion is not a lot of money if it can last another 100 years.
Why are people comparing SRC new builds to restoring a 200 year old Gothic stone building? It’s like suggesting you should be able to restore a 250 GTO for the same cost as manufacturing a 458 Stradale.
Personally I think our architecture should be preserved, so just pay whatever it costs.
Personally I think our architecture should be preserved, so just pay whatever it costs.
CamMoreRon said:
Hey buddy! How's it going?
I'm not irritated by it, I just think that kind of imposing traditionalist stuff has a certain effect on people's behaviour.
In that case I'd prefer they stay.I'm not irritated by it, I just think that kind of imposing traditionalist stuff has a certain effect on people's behaviour.
Lord knows there's already enough short-term thinking in Parliament. Maybe there is archaic thinking encouraged, but there's also a reminder that there is a responsibility to stop things going wrong for more than 5 years.
If a company had this as their HQ and was running this they would relocate to a more cost effective building. The fact that the building and land is owned/used by HMG. Queeny.
Clearly as a historic building it needs to be maintained but by whom and for what purpose is the question or for what future purpose.
I would imagine the tourist attraction as a historic building would be large to go and visit and walk around. Im sure a large part of the building could be sold off and developed for offices/accommodation as well.
So you could have the benefit of retaining the main historic parts - debating chambers, entrance halls as a museum/attraction and the rest sold off for accommodation/offices and would generate a large sum.
Quite how much I would not guess but it would be good if it bought in enough to build a new modern parliament building - perhaps on the millennium stadium (thought that only had a life span of 8 years?)
So is that not a win/win for all? Its retained as a historic building and open to the public the main chambers/wow parts and the rest sold to pay for a new building. Im sure for special one day events the historic parts could be used for the show and then everyone heads off to the new building.
Clearly as a historic building it needs to be maintained but by whom and for what purpose is the question or for what future purpose.
I would imagine the tourist attraction as a historic building would be large to go and visit and walk around. Im sure a large part of the building could be sold off and developed for offices/accommodation as well.
So you could have the benefit of retaining the main historic parts - debating chambers, entrance halls as a museum/attraction and the rest sold off for accommodation/offices and would generate a large sum.
Quite how much I would not guess but it would be good if it bought in enough to build a new modern parliament building - perhaps on the millennium stadium (thought that only had a life span of 8 years?)
So is that not a win/win for all? Its retained as a historic building and open to the public the main chambers/wow parts and the rest sold to pay for a new building. Im sure for special one day events the historic parts could be used for the show and then everyone heads off to the new building.
Gargamel said:
Pay the money, do it properly.
I don't have an issue with it. There is a heritage and tradition to Parliament that we over look at our peril.
Whilst cynics will says it gives MPs delusion of their own importance.
I also believe it conveys the gravitas and responsibility of the role of MP. The traditions are a part of the way our democracy functions, and its rules and customs.
Separately and I understand it isn't common knowledge, there is a considerable amount of Asbestos in there.
That's my view. Some things just have to be preserved no matter what the cost.I don't have an issue with it. There is a heritage and tradition to Parliament that we over look at our peril.
Whilst cynics will says it gives MPs delusion of their own importance.
I also believe it conveys the gravitas and responsibility of the role of MP. The traditions are a part of the way our democracy functions, and its rules and customs.
Separately and I understand it isn't common knowledge, there is a considerable amount of Asbestos in there.
McWigglebum4th said:
Dog Star said:
3 billion?
Not perhaps a fair comparison, but just to put that amount of money into perspective....
This cost 1.5 billion DOLLARS!
But you can't compare the twoNot perhaps a fair comparison, but just to put that amount of money into perspective....
This cost 1.5 billion DOLLARS!
As that was built in backward country which is rife with corruption and inefficiency
Which is why they have such poor value for money
i think
Hooli said:
That's my view. Some things just have to be preserved no matter what the cost.
And mine. This applies to any listed building in my book, and this is not just any listed building.Make PoW a museum + build a new parliament = PoW still needs restoration, and as above they won't be able to afford maintenence. How much bloody more will that cost than this restoration?
Edited by mizx on Thursday 8th September 16:21
I do trust that they'll obtain 3 separate quotes for the work.
Are we having a sweep on what the final cost will be? £3B, current estimate; I'll plump for £6.75B.
Edited to add that I now see there are already official estimates up to £5.7B; I'll go for £9B.
Are we having a sweep on what the final cost will be? £3B, current estimate; I'll plump for £6.75B.
Edited to add that I now see there are already official estimates up to £5.7B; I'll go for £9B.
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 8th September 17:12
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff