A COMMON theme in most of my columns has been the Tory austerity agenda, cracking down on those reliant on benefits, refusing to provide a decent pension solution for those involved in the WASPI campaign and cutting vital public services such as housing – yet there is one area where funding does not appear to be an issue. The refurbishment of the UK Parliament (or to give it it’s formal title – the Palace of Westminster).

No one can deny that it is an impressive building. It is easy to get carried away with the grandeur of the place, the artworks that line the corridors and the sense of history that fills the chambers. However, once you look a little bit closer you realise everything isn’t as good as it seems.

From rain leaking into the building to dodgy wiring, it’s clear that this is a building that needs a major overhaul.

In 2012, a study on the condition of the Palace was undertaken by a joint Commons and Lords Parliamentary team. The results were shocking. Although the main elements of the parliament that were built from 1840s onwards were considered innovative for their time, a lack of investment, maintenance and care for the building has resulted in a complex that requires significant restoration work. If this is not done, then, according to this study, there is a real likelihood that major, irreversible damage may be done to the building.

Many parts of the palace have not had any significant renovation since they were built and the lack of a comprehensive, or even a basic maintenance routine, has resulted in a large and growing backlog of work.

Due to only working around the sittings of Parliament – and the high levels of asbestos within the building – intrusive renovation work has been limited. This has resulted in a piecemeal approach to maintenance, with only the most-necessary work being carried out. All the while, more problems arise as the building deteriorates further and the backlog of repairs grows longer. This has brought us to the present situation, where a major renovation is required.

The Parliamentary authorities have outlined three potential solutions. These all involve refurbishing the Palace of Westminster and outline potential timescales and costs for each solution. The timescales run from 6six years to 32 years and the costs vary from £3.5 billion to almost £6bn.

The longest and costliest option would be to carry out all the major work whilest the Parliament is still being used, with the Commons and Lords each closing temporarily for between two and four2 to 4 years. The closures would be at different times and they would be relocated to a temporary chamber elsewhere in or around the palace. With such a major renovation taking place, there would be high levels of noise and disruption over a long period. This is the costliest option of almost £6bn and would take 32 years to complete.

The next option would be to move the Commons and then the Lords into temporary accommodation outside the palace to allow some renovation. However, even this approach is estimated to take around 11 years and cost in the region of £4bn.

The third option would be to fully vacate the palace by finding alternative chambers for the Commons and Lords. This would allow the work to be carried out more quickly, but would still take around six6 years and cost between £3.5bn and £4bn.

In each of these options, the costs are staggering. At a time when Tory austerity is harming public services, then it seems difficult to accept the lack of scrutiny in these plans. The costs involved in the refurbishment of the Palace of Westminster look like a slap in the face to those who have had to suffer from the Tory austerity agenda. It makes the Parliamentary bodies appear out of touch with what is happening outside Westminster.

The dilapidation of the Parliamentary complex has been brought about by a complete disregard for essential maintenance. Every home owner would be able to tell you about the importance of looking after a property, yet here we have generations of politicians who put off decisions and ignored the warnings until it got to the stage that there is a potential danger of (parts of) the building actually falling down.

This disregard for basic maintenance of the structure of the Parliamentary complex is almost symbolic of the demise in the trust of politicians.

Yet we still need a Parliament, so what other option is available? Well, the one which was overlooked by the report was to start again. Stop trying to squeeze the needs of a modern 21st-century country into an outdated museum. Use this opportunity to renew and revitalise democracy within the UK. Build a Parliament that is worthy of the name, one that incorporates the best of modern parliaments.

For instance, using electronic voting would save hundreds of hours in each parliamentary year – instead of the current process of queueing in lobbies, which can take around 20 minutes per vote. Normally such a massive efficiency saving would be jumped on by the Tories – so why not this time?

We could have a carbon-neutral building, one that uses fewer resources but has modern IT infrastructure, a chamber (or two, if we still have the Lords) that allows every member to get a seat, and a building that could be easily accessible to those with disabilities.

We could even look at moving the Parliament out from London, why not have it based elsewhere?. Some groups have called for it to be based in York or even in the North West of England, but why not Wales, or Northern Ireland?

If we’re going to invest in a Parliament for the future, let it be one that is fit for the future, not a rehash of an outdated and outmoded building. The current building could be upgraded – to make it safe – and used as a museum (which it mostly feels like).

We need to open up this debate to the public. The report highlights the potential problems afflicting the building but How urgent are the repairs when one of the proposals would take 32 years to complete? We need to ask why everyone else in the UK, including public services, should have to suffer from austerity and cutbacks while big-money plans to refurbish Parliament are raised by Parliamentarians without so much as a blink of an eye?

Parliaments should represent the democracies they serve and they should take into account the thoughts and feelings of everyone, not just a small minority of Parliamentarians who think nothing of spending billions to maintain their workplace while others suffer their ideologically driven cuts.