Palace Of Westminster

Crazyface

Crazyface

Tour Winner
Joined
Feb 27, 2010
Messages
7,730
Location
Cheshire
Visit site
£3.9 BILLION to sort the crumbling mess out apparently. If I remember correctly it is built with sandstone, muppets! Round my way, the local footie players buy up the property, knock 'em down and then rebuild to what they want, it massively cheaper!

I think London could learn from this :thup:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Crazyface said:
£3.9 BILLION to sort the crumbling mess out apparently. If I remember correctly it is built with sandstone, muppets! Round my way, the local footie players buy up the property, knock 'em down and then rebuild to what they want, it massively cheaper!

I think London could learn from this :thup:
Click to expand...

What's London got to do with it?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Don't think your footballers are knocking down any Grade 1 listed UNESCO World Heritage sites are they? :rolleyes:

And what's a Palce?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Crazyface said:
£3.9 BILLION to sort the crumbling mess out apparently. If I remember correctly it is built with sandstone, muppets! Round my way, the local footie players buy up the property, knock 'em down and then rebuild to what they want, it massively cheaper!

I think London could learn from this :thup:
Click to expand...
Its a listed building you can't just go knocking our history down .
But it would be easier and cheaper to build a parliamentary chamber somewhere else for day to day business and just use the old building for ceremonial use this would reduce the cost of refurbishment.
as for Footballers the less said the better
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And you don't care about the £3.9 billion? BILLION!!!! Once again BILLION!. Hey maybe we could ask the EU for the money? A last hurrah from them?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Crazyface said:
£3.9 BILLION to sort the crumbling mess out apparently. If I remember correctly it is built with sandstone, muppets! Round my way, the local footie players buy up the property, knock 'em down and then rebuild to what they want, it massively cheaper!

I think London could learn from this :thup:
Click to expand...

Totally unfit for purpose in a modern UK both the building and the folk inside it.
Hand it over to London and let them pay for it, I am sure millions of entry fees from tourists hoping for a glimpse of Prince Edward will keep it going.

What a complete waste of our taxes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm another for moving Parliament out of there. Build a fit for purpose building with a chamber that is less adversarial. Let the Palace of Westminster be opened to tourists in key parts, other sections for whatever. Upgrading a centuries old building to modern day standards is impractical and excessively expensive. This is a good chance to start again, perhaps even regenerate a new area with a Parliament and all that goes with it.

One comment did shock me this morning. Apparently they have semi regular small fires in the building due to the poor electrics and leaking pipes. Not a great combination.

Doon, I don't think anyone has wanted a glimpse of Prince Edward. No money to be made there.
 
Our business has been recruiting the people that are involved with the restoration.

Phenomenal the amount of stuff they're doing though.
 
Doon frae Troon said:
Totally unfit for purpose in a modern UK both the building and the folk inside it.
Hand it over to London and let them pay for it, I am sure millions of entry fees from tourists hoping for a glimpse of Prince Edward will keep it going.

What a complete waste of our taxes.
Click to expand...

So I guess that in 100 years when the Scottish Parliament building needs renovating that you will not be willing to have your taxes pay for it (Not that any of us will be around) The Building at Holyrood cost £414 million was miles over budget and years behind schedule. It may or may not become an iconic building over that time architecturally and may or may not be worth saving.

Westminster however, is a World Heritage site, like Edinburgh, so you have to preserve what is there as it is our history, that is why it is more expensive. deal with it.

costing far less than the HS2 debacle
 
CF - I always wonder when they get to those sorts of number how genuinely accurate they are or whether they just start plucking numbers out of the air. I'm trying to imagine the spreadsheet for costs, suppliers etc for a project that is £3.9bn. As always, that figure will no doubt not be hit. How far over budget will it end up being? It is an astronomical sum.
 
PhilTheFragger said:
So I guess that in 100 years when the Scottish Parliament building needs renovating that you will not be willing to have your taxes pay for it (Not that any of us will be around) The Building at Holyrood cost £414 million was miles over budget and years behind schedule. It may or may not become an iconic building over that time architecturally and may or may not be worth saving.

Westminster however, is a World Heritage site, like Edinburgh, so you have to preserve what is there as it is our history, that is why it is more expensive. deal with it.

costing far less than the HS2 debacle
Click to expand...


Try about 5 years from what I read..... Enormous maintenance costs at Holyrood which is a "new" building...

I agree that tax money (to this extent) is a waste and would vote to create a new purpose built government building(s) somewhere. Even outside of London to reduce the expenses/second home costs etc if required
 
You also need to look at the income it generates in tourists wanting to see it. The area is full of tourists all day every day. It is a big draw to this country for foreign tourists. Just because its in London doesn't mean it should be left to rot, how many tourists would want to go visit Solihul or similar?
 
Bunkermagnet said:
You also need to look at the income it generates in tourists wanting to see it. The area is full of tourists all day every day. It is a big draw to this country for foreign tourists. Just because its in London doesn't mean it should be left to rot, how many tourists would want to go visit Solihul or similar?
Click to expand...

These tourists are visiting London first and while in the city take a squint at Big Ben and HoP.

3.9billion is too high and is a bad investment based on the marginal additional revenue from tourism.

At some point we have to be brave about keeping old 'stuff' and ask ourselves what we can afford.

Look at the vast expense of 'history. These projects: HoP, 'Buck' house etc are poorly utilised and the notional return is too small to justify the sentimentality. Especially at a time when young people can't even buy a flat!
 
Is it not part of the Crown Estates, which returned over £200 million surplus last year?

Bearing in mind it was burnt down and rebuilt 200 years ago, maybe its due another insurance job?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top