Addressee: R&R Client Team · Source location: Page 12, recommendation a
The Client Board should ensure that, at key stages, the Programme publishes
a clear, non-technical summary, potentially alongside its business case, akin to
Strategy and Delivery Plans used for mega-projects. The summary should:
? explain how the Programme has evolved, including the rationale for key
decisions and how they fit together;
? show how those decisions constrain current options, including implications
for cost, risk, scope and delivery approach, and the associated
trade-offs; and
? be kept up to date and provided at key Parliamentary decision points to
support informed scrutiny and decision-making.
Response position:
No response position recorded
Delivery:
No implementation status recorded
Addressee: R&R Client Team · Source location: Page 12, recommendation b
The Client Team?s more detailed plans for the phase one works should include
cost estimate ranges for all work packages and set out how it will manage
interdependencies between key projects
Response position:
No response position recorded
Delivery:
No implementation status recorded
Addressee: R&R Client Team · Source location: Page 12, recommendation c
The Clerks should ensure that the Programme and related estate works are
managed through a single, integrated delivery/masterplan, which acts as the
framework for coordinating interdependent projects and supporting timely
decision-making.
This internally-facing plan should:
? set out the sequencing, dependencies and interrelationships between
projects, including temporary accommodation, major works and
estate-wide works;
? provide a clear view of programme-wide risks and the impact of changes,
so that implications can be understood across the Programme; and
? show where decisions on interdependent projects need to be coordinated
across the Programme.
Response position:
No response position recorded
Delivery:
No implementation status recorded
Addressee: R&R Client Team · Source location: Page 12, recommendation d
To help set a clear scope of works, the Clerks need to work with Members at
speed to create a clear vision of the target operating models for each House
and for Parliament overall, in their temporary accommodation.
Response position:
No response position recorded
Delivery:
No implementation status recorded
Addressee: R&R Client Team · Source location: Page 13, recommendation e, first bullet
As the Client Team reviews governance arrangements for the Programme,
it should:
? map Programme governance onto existing and future Parliamentary
delegated authorities and committee structures. It should then test
Programme governance against realistic scenarios (such as delays
to temporary accommodation availability, late changes to Member
requirements) to see whether it enables timely decisions and
clear accountability;
Response position:
No response position recorded
Delivery:
No implementation status recorded
Addressee: R&R Client Team · Source location: Page 13, recommendation e, fifth bullet
consider how the governance structure encourages and supports an
open and honest culture from Parliament through the Delivery Authority
and into the supply chain, and how it would know it has been successful.
Response position:
No response position recorded
Delivery:
No implementation status recorded
Addressee: R&R Client Team · Source location: Page 13, recommendation e, second bullet
ensure the governance model is suitable for the next phase of the
project -for example, during the decant phase there will need to be clear
mechanisms for ensuring temporary accommodation is delivered on
time and to budget, and enables the effective running of Parliament?s
functions, at the same time as running critical enabling works, such as
strategic partner procurements, design work and planning;
Response position:
No response position recorded
Delivery:
No implementation status recorded
Addressee: R&R Client Team · Source location: Page 13, recommendation 3, third bullet
set out an accountability framework that defines who can make what
decisions and ensures that those who have the authority to make
decisions are accountable for the impact of those decisions on the
project; this should include delegating routine approvals to the lowest
possible level and introducing a formal fast-track escalation route for
urgent critical-path decisions
Response position:
No response position recorded
Delivery:
No implementation status recorded
Addressee: R&R Client Team · Source location: Page 13, recommendation e, fourth bullet
update terms of reference for each board/committee/sub-group
involved in the Programme to separate decision-making, assurance and
delivery management, then publish a simple ?how decisions get made?
route map; and
Response position:
No response position recorded
Delivery:
No implementation status recorded