Palace of Westminster Restoration and Renewal Programme: Spending

Debate between Baroness Smith of Basildon and Baroness Scott of Needham Market
Tuesday 24th November 2020

(3 years, 11 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Baroness Scott of Needham Market Portrait Baroness Scott of Needham Market (LD) [V]
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I assure the noble Lord that the sponsor body is well aware of the lessons learned. In fact, the first item of business at our first meeting was a presentation from Caroline Shenton. The National Audit Office has highlighted that, in fact, nothing has changed: there has to be consistent political buy-in for a project of this size, which will last this long. Further to that, we are spending around £127 million this year just on ongoing maintenance, so doing nothing is not a cost-free option.

Baroness Smith of Basildon Portrait Baroness Smith of Basildon (Lab)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Scott, for her answers. She is answering for the sponsor body today, because of her commitment to this project. I wish that were the case for everybody making decisions on this project, but the point made by the noble Lord, Lord McNally, on political interference was one of the risks identified by the committee on which I served in 2016, which put the urgency of the work needed at centre stage. I ask that the information she just provided about £100 million-worth of repairs each year, and what that money has been spent on, is put in the public domain and circulated to noble Lords interested in this. The PAC reported that every week of delay costs the taxpayer £2 million and puts the safety of employees and visitors at risk. That should be a sobering thought for anybody who wishes to delay this project.

Baroness Scott of Needham Market Portrait Baroness Scott of Needham Market (LD) [V]
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The noble Baroness is right to highlight the need for consistent political support, which came across clearly from the NAO. It is difficult enough to work out the cost of doing something, but the cost of not doing something is more difficult. We are attempting precisely that because, when parliamentarians make their decisions, they must understand that doing nothing at all will be very expensive indeed.