Oral Answers to Questions

Rachael Maskell Excerpts

Thursday 10th September 2020 Commons Chamber

The right hon. Member for East Hampshire, representing the Parliamentary Works Sponsor Body, was asked—

[Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

What discussions the (a) Prime Minister and (b) Prime Minister's staff have had with the Parliamentary Works Sponsor Body on the (i) timeline, (ii) cost and (iii) logistics of relocating the House of Lords to York.

[Damian Hinds (East Hampshire)]

There have not been discussions of that nature with the sponsor body, but the hon. Lady will be aware of the recent exchange of correspondence on the restoration and renewal review, copies of which have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

[Rachael Maskell]

I thank the right hon. Member for his candid reply. Stakeholders in York expended time, energy and money on the House of Lords proposals the Prime Minister announced in January, so to learn today that the Prime Minister did not engage in due process is, quite frankly, shocking; it just shows his populist virtue signalling to my city and the north. Will the right hon. Member communicate to No. 10 that, if the Prime Minister is going to put forward proposals, he must go through due process before wasting time in places like my city, where people desperately needed the jobs that he was proposing?

[Damian Hinds]

I think the hon. Lady might have inferred something from my answer that was not actually there. To be absolutely clear, the sponsor body of the restoration and renewal programme works within the remit provided by Parliament and is currently conducting a review, looking at a range of options to make sure that we get continued, uninterrupted and sound operation of this place and secure value for money for the British public.