Three billion minimum to repair the Houses of Parliament

Three billion minimum to repair the Houses of Parliament

Author
Discussion

dudleybloke

19,825 posts

186 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
A few thousand bricks and some cement will solve the problem.

Just wait till they vote on a pay rise so we know it will be full then brick up the doors and windows.

We still have a nice tourist attraction and we can take bets on how long till they start to eat each other and who will be the last mp in the house.


MarshPhantom

9,658 posts

137 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
FourWheelDrift said:
MarshPhantom said:
Somewhere new south of the river I reckon. Not sure where you'd find the land on the north side.
Go West? Somerset levels. smile


Top of these cliffs looks ideal.

jdw100

4,117 posts

164 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
Leithen said:
It's not fit for purpose - The Commons can only seat 427 of the 650 MPs.

If we are going to spend 3 Billion, turn the existing pile into a tourist attraction that can help pay for it's upkeep.

Build a new circular chamber, geographically central to the UK, close to rail links etc. Design a seating programme so that MPs cannot sit beside more than one of their colleagues in each parliament. The chamber can be alternate use for Commons/Lords.

Then we might get some oratory/debate worth listening to.

Build Offices next door designed to allow constituents to see their MP.

Pay travelodge to put up a 650 bed hotel next door.
You get my vote.

irocfan

40,449 posts

190 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
MarshPhantom said:
FourWheelDrift said:
MarshPhantom said:
Somewhere new south of the river I reckon. Not sure where you'd find the land on the north side.
Go West? Somerset levels. smile


Top of these cliffs looks ideal.
I'd say the bottom of them looks better

RYH64E

7,960 posts

244 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
irocfan said:
MarshPhantom said:
FourWheelDrift said:
MarshPhantom said:
Somewhere new south of the river I reckon. Not sure where you'd find the land on the north side.
Go West? Somerset levels. smile


Top of these cliffs looks ideal.
I'd say the bottom of them looks better
Wait a few weeks and what's at the top now will be at the bottom...

irocfan

40,449 posts

190 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
RYH64E said:
irocfan said:
MarshPhantom said:
FourWheelDrift said:
MarshPhantom said:
Somewhere new south of the river I reckon. Not sure where you'd find the land on the north side.
Go West? Somerset levels. smile


Top of these cliffs looks ideal.
I'd say the bottom of them looks better
Wait a few weeks and what's at the top now will be at the bottom...
I'm impatient

gazapc

1,321 posts

160 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
waterwonder said:
Just me that thinks it should stay where it is then?

The building and history contained within it are part of it in my opinion are part of the institution that has been our democracy for centuries. People come and go but I like that the building has remained.

The cost is absolutely outrageous i agree, however for once I'd actually admire a decision to protect one of our British institutions and hang the consequences instead of letting it be eroded into another homogeneous pile of ste purely on the basis of 'cost'.

In a hundred years time i can't imagine anyone looking back and thinking i'm glad those sensible people in 2015 moved parliament to an industrial estate in Milton Keynes and sold Westminster to investors from Dubai
This absolutely. Sure a temporary home while work is being undertaken, yes, a permanent move, absolutely no.

Most modern parliament buildings look abslutely s**t.

Moving away from it and palming it off to wealthy investors in my view is like the destruction of old Euston or the knocking down of dozens of country estate homes in the 40s/50s. Westminster is part of our heritage.

dudleybloke

19,825 posts

186 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
The poles will do it for 1 billion.

xjsdriver

1,071 posts

121 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
Randy Winkman said:
The vast majority of those civil servants (and I am one, working about 200 yards from the H of P) don't need to be anywhere near that place and the current change to "flexible working" in the last 2 years has made that even more obvious. Many of the historic Whitehall buildings, such as those that house HMT, Cabinet Office and MoD also either need doing up or could be sold off with even less of a problem than Parliament. And, in my opinion, the civil service is soon going to move away from the idea that departments need one big HQ where all of there staff are located around. It's a win all round if we get rid of the current H of P.
At last - there is someone who talks sense on here........ let's have some more!!!

PlankWithANailIn

439 posts

149 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
Can't they just rent a big meeting room when they all need to meet once in a blue moon and use electronic means for everything else? It's not like any debating actually occurs in the main chamber anyway.


petemurphy

10,122 posts

183 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
love to see a breakdown of costs. if theyve quoted 3 it will be 5..

FourWheelDrift

88,523 posts

284 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
petemurphy said:
love to see a breakdown of costs. if theyve quoted 3 it will be 5..
Quoted - £3billion.

Real cost - £25billion

Hol

8,412 posts

200 months

Wednesday 4th March 2015
quotequote all
How much dd the Scottish or Welsh assembly buildings cost??


If only this news was last year, there were a few ex Olympic buildings going unused in Stratford.