If you pulled Parliament down, where would you put the MP's, given that the size of premises they would need, plus costs for security, infrastructure and so on would be colossal, so a bill is going to come from somewhere.
Personally, I think enough of our history is destroyed routinely by developers and Luddite councillors, so they should do what is necessary to save this iconic building.
Of course we could also follow current business trends and seriously downsize them. Then outsource all the support functions (I'm sure the like of Capita, Serco, etc who have made such inroads into the NHS would find it a doddle).
It's a fabulous piece of architecture, famous throughout the world, it has to be restored, it was the last example of English high-craftsmanship.
nec plus ultra.
But it won't be restored with the same degree of high-craftsmanship, and you'll end up with a "rebuilding" rather than a "restoring": it just will not be the same building will it?
I agree with andy and Khandro It embodies much of our history and is known through out the world as one of the most iconic emblems of GB.If you dont think it's worth it I suggest you stand on Westminster Bridge on a sunny afternoon and try and count the different nationalities that have come to look at it.It's value as a tourist attraction is huge,you don't get that many people fying half way round the world to "selfie" themselves in front of the Shard.
Andy, I was thinking Milton Keynes or nearer Birmingham so they are in the middle of all of us.
It's pretty easy to secure a greenfield site, plenty of Banks manage it. In fact much easier than securing an old Victorian building in the middle of London.
Might not be so nice for the MP's but if we put a bar and a strip club in in, pretty sure most will be ok.
7Bn is just too much. It's not the original building anyway.
//It embodies much of our history and is known through out the world as one of the most iconic emblems of GB.//
then sell it to a developer with the proviso that they retain the external appearance. if converted to luxury flats, the developer will make back the cost many times over.
Would it be a possible solution to start demolishing & rebuilding half of it then move MPs into the renovated area & start on the other half ? This would of course save the cost of accommodating MPs in temporary quarters whilst refurbishments take place.
Does it matter how much longer it takes to repair the iconic historic building ? Such heritage isn't going to be left to be lost anyway.
And how come there is not already a secure set of building for when Parliament has to have a re-org ? Damned poor foresight on the part of those whose job it is to ensure a bright future for all.