Home / Sources / Select Committees / Public Accounts Committee / Restoration and renewal of Parliament
Index live
Select Committee · Public Accounts Committee

Restoration and renewal of Parliament

Status: Closed Opened: 26 Jan 2022 Closed: 2 Sep 2022 11 recommendations 29 conclusions 1 report

Over a year ago the Committee reported that every week of delayed repairs to crumbling Parliament was costing the taxpayer another £2 million . The Palace of Westminster Restoration and Renewal Programme, widely endorsed as a necessity to preserve a historically and politically significant building, is at a critical stage: its next formal milestone is … Show more

Clear

Reports

1 report
Title HC No. Published Items Response
Tenth Report - Restoration and Renewal of Parliament HC 49 29 Jun 2022 40 Responded

Recommendations & Conclusions

4 items
2 Recommendation Tenth Report - Restoration and Renewal … Deferred

The House of Commons Commission proposed to dissolve the Sponsor Body without considering why governance...

The House of Commons Commission proposed to dissolve the Sponsor Body without considering why governance arrangements did not work and potential alternatives, including whether the House administrations can satisfactorily oversee work. Following a discussion of the indicative cost and schedule estimates and a continued presence assessment, the Commission proposed that … Read more

Government response AI summary
The recommendation is directed to Parliament to consider appropriate governance arrangements. The Commissions have provided a report to both Houses in order to support their decision-making, taking into account advice from an Independent Advice and Assurance Panel.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
14 Conclusion Tenth Report - Restoration and Renewal … Deferred

In February 2022, the House of Commons Commission proposed that the sponsor function should transfer...

In February 2022, the House of Commons Commission proposed that the sponsor function should transfer to a “new, separate department serving both Houses”, with its head formally accountable to the Clerk of the House or the Clerks of both Houses and ultimately to the Commissions.37 The House of Lords Commission … Read more

Government response AI summary
The Committee’s recommendation is for Parliament itself. It is therefore not for the Accounting Officers to give a substantive response.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
15 Conclusion Tenth Report - Restoration and Renewal … Deferred

On 14 June 2022, the Commissions published the areas where they sought the Houses agreement.

On 14 June 2022, the Commissions published the areas where they sought the Houses agreement. This included that the Sponsor Body should be replaced, and that the sponsorship function, now termed client function, would be brought in-house to Parliament for these early programme stages. In practice, the Clerks of the … Read more

Government response AI summary
The government states that this recommendation is for Parliament itself and that it is therefore not for the Accounting Officers to give a substantive response. They note that the Commissions have provided a report to both Houses in order to support their decision-making.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
22 Conclusion Tenth Report - Restoration and Renewal … Deferred

In proposing to replace the Sponsor Body, the Commission did not set out what options...

In proposing to replace the Sponsor Body, the Commission did not set out what options were considered for the revised governance and how they differed from existing arrangements.54 The Sponsor Body told us that it has not been involved in all the conversations that led to the Commission’s proposals.55 We … Read more

Government response AI summary
This recommendation is for Parliament, and initial options relating to the governance arrangements for the delivery phase of the programme will be considered as part of the strategic case put to Parliament. The Commissions have provided a report to both Houses in order to support …
Read full response →
HM Treasury

Oral evidence sessions

2 sessions
Date Witnesses
11 May 2022 David Goldstone CBE · Palace of Westminster Restoration and Renewal Delivery Authority, Dr John Benger · House of Commons, Indra Morris · Children’s Services, Communications & Strategy Group, Sarah Johnson · Palace of Westminster Restoration and Renewal Sponsor Body, Simon Burton · House of Lords, Stephanie Brivio · Department for Education, Susan Acland-Hood · The Department for Education View ↗
14 Mar 2022 David Goldstone · HM Treasury, Dr John Benger · House of Commons, Sarah Johnson · Palace of Westminster Restoration and Renewal Sponsor Body, Simon Burton · House of Lords View ↗

Who gave evidence

8 witnesses
WitnessOrganisationSessions
Dr John Benger · Clerk of the House House of Commons 2
Sarah Johnson · Chief Executive Palace of Westminster Restoration and Renewal Sponsor Body 2
Simon Burton · Clerk of the Parliaments House of Lords 2
David Goldstone · Independent Chair at The Office for Value for Mon… HM Treasury 1
David Goldstone CBE · Chief Executive Palace of Westminster Restoration and Renewal Delivery Authority 1
Indra Morris · Director General Children’s Services, Communications & Strategy Group 1
Stephanie Brivio · Director, Safeguarding and Children’s Social Care Department for Education 1
Susan Acland-Hood · Permanent Secretary The Department for Education 1

Correspondence

4 letters
DateDirectionTitle
6 Jul 2022 — Correspondence from the House of Commons, House of Lords, Restoration & Renewal…
24 May 2022 — Joint Correspondence from Simon Burton, Clerk of the Parliaments, House of Lord…
25 Apr 2022 — Public Accounts Committee—follow-up update on the Restoration and Renewal Prog…
30 Mar 2022 — Correspondence from Dr John Benger, Clerk of the House of Commons Palace of Wes…