Move out of Parliament or repairs will cost taxpayers £7bn and take up to 40 years, MPs are told

Repairing the crumbling Houses of Parliament could take as long as 40 years and cost taxpayers £7 billion if MPs refuse to temporarily decamp elsewhere, a report has concluded.

An independent appraisal by industry experts set out the options for refurbishing the 150-year-old Grade I listed building, with the cheapest option - costing £3.5 billion - requiring MPs and peers to decamp to an alternative location for six years while repairs are carried out.

But the Cabinet minister in charge of the House of Commons, Chris Grayling, told MPs this morning that he did not want to see MPs evacuated, suggesting it would undermine Britain's democracy.

 Birmingham library - a location where some of the city's MPs have suggested Parliament could be moved to during the restoration work
The report, conducted by Deloitte, predicted that were MPs to stay put, it could take anything between 25-40 years to finish the repairs, with 32 years the "most likely" amount of time. The cost of this option would be between £4.9 billion and £7.1 billion. The report recommended against this option, concluding that it would deliver “no additional amenity and functionality”.
A middle option, whereby the House of Commons and House of Lords take it in turns to relocate, would take an estimated 11 years and cost £3.9 billion.
The committee of parliamentarians examining the report will be co-chaired by Mr Grayling and Baroness Stowell, Leader of the House of Lords, with MPs will be given the final say on the matter.
There have been demands for Parliament to be moved to a different city entirely, such as Birmingham, Leeds or Manchester, but it is unlikely MPs will be moved out of London because it would be highly inconvenient and disruptive for government ministers and officials based in Whitehall, as well as the many businesses, charities and think tanks based in the capital that have close links to parliamentary business.
Sir Alan Duncan, a former Conservative minister, said relocating out of the capital would be "utterly impractical" and should be avoided at any cost. “If it’s £6bn, £7bn, £8bn, I think we should spend it,” he told the World at One.

However Labour MP Graham Stringer, who represents the Greater Manchester seat of Blackley and Broughton, said MPs should take the opportunity to move MPs out of London permanently to combat the problem of over-centralisation.
"You could move the Whitehall departments as well, that’s the essence of decentralising," Mr Stringer said. "We have an opportunity; we have to spend a huge wad of money, an absolutely vast amount of money and it's an opportunity both to benefit the regions and London as a great commercial centre. A lot of the centre of London would be better used for commercial usage."
The annual bill for general maintenance work reached £48.7 million this year and considering no major repairs have been undertaken since the 1950s, a decision over how the building is saved must be made early on in this Parliament.
Mr Grayling, laying out his opposition to moving MPs out of the building, told MPs earlier today: “We’ll take a decision on the best way forward but that decision will be subject from both Houses of Parliament and will be subject to extensive discussion in the months ahead.
“My very clear view is that this building is an important part of our national heritage and our democracy and it must remain as such and I am not warmed to the idea that we should look to move elsewhere.
“Nonetheless we do need to face the challenges to make sure it is fit for the 21st century and that discussion will involve all members of this House.”