The House of Commons voted in favour of a “full and timely decant” from the Palace of Westminster to allow essential repairs by 236 votes to 220.
The planned move will not take place until 2025 at the earliest and possibly last for around six years.
Opening the debate, the leader of the House of Commons, Andrea Leadsom, told MPs 24-hour fire patrols are “necessary to keep us safe” because of a lack of fire compartmentation in the building.
“Over the past 10 years, 60 incidents have had the potential to cause a serious fire,” added Ms Leadsom.
“Secondly, there is a huge amount of asbestos packed into the walls that needs to be carefully and expensively removed to enable repairs.
“Thirdly, many pipes and cables are decades past their lifespan, with some now being impossible to access.”
She added the likelihood of a “major failure” grows the longer the systems are left unaddressed.
“As leader of the House, I work closely with the clerk, the director general and others who are responsible for the safety and wellbeing of those in this building to ensure that risks are minimised,” she told MPs.
“There are more than 7,500 people working in Parliament, and we welcome 1 million visitors each year, including many schoolchildren. Nevertheless, keeping everyone safe is becoming a growing challenge with each passing year.”
During the lengthy parliamentary debate, MPs discussed the issue of working safely in the Palace of Westminster, the cost of the repairs and where MPs would go in the work is being carried out.
The Conservative MP Sir Paul Beresford told the chamber “the longer we wait, the risk of a catastrophic collapse of services nears upon us”.
“Most members will be aware that the House has a basement, which has a long passageway that runs the length of the building,” he told MPs.
“There are 86 vertical chimneys running from that passageway and they were originally designed for ventilation. That of course means a fire could travel laterally and vertically extremely quickly.”
While SNP MP Pete Wishart commented that the “simple fact is that the decision should have been made a decade ago” and not “kicked into touch for another Parliament to deal with.”
“The whole story of resolving our difficulties in this House is littered with prevarication and indecision,” he added.
The House of Lords will vote on the motion next week.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Why not turn the Palace of Westminster into a Museum of Democracy, invest in a modern, purpose-built Parliament in the north, and give real meaning to the Northern Powerhouse? As long as Government remains in Westminster areas outside the M25 will continue to be ignored and forgotten.
PS Move all the London-based civil servants too!
I currently work as a SHE advisor for an Engineering company, whilst I totally agree with safeguarding employee emotional Mental Health & Wellbeing within the workplace I still don’t believe there is legislative support to force employers to have the appropriate numbers of Mental Health First Aiders within their organisation. There’s a substantial amount of good work and advice out in there in the public domain to aid people during periods of mental ill health, but in the workplace I feel we are falling short with legislation stating an employer should / Must have appropriately trained Mental Health First Aiders. The First Aid At Work Regulations state that an employer MUST have sufficient First Aid Provisions based on site risk, size, and numbers employed, so why don’t we apply the same principle for Mental Health First Aid. Why don’t the government examine the First Aid at Work Regulations and incorporate Mental Health First Aid within that legislation?