SNP MP Kirsty Blackman slammed the “ridicul-ously self-indulgent debate” on spending billions repairing the crumbling palace of Westminster.

The Aberdeen North ­representative made the comments during a general debate on the issue in the House of Commons yesterday afternoon.

In March, Commons leader Jacob Rees-Mogg claimed costs for Parliament’s restorations could hit £20 billion – compared to a previous ­estimate of £4bn.

Blackman hit out at the “huge amount of money” being allocated to the refurbishments when the country is still recovering from the pandemic.

Blackman said: “This afternoon is space for a general debate, we could have been debating my colleague in Paisley and Renfrewshire North’s fire and rehire bill, we could be ­debating Glasgow central’s issues about dawn raids, we could have been debating the fact that the EU settlement scheme is only open until the 30th of June and our constituents have only got that long to apply for settled status. Instead we are taking part in this ridiculously self-indulgent debate talking about improving the workplace for MPs.

“Now, I believe the building is dark, it’s smelly, it’s inaccessible and it’s unsafe, I however believe that this was not the time to be discussing this. Particularly when we’re coming out of the period of time where people have been excluded from payments, people have not had money over this period of time because of the government’s furlough scheme falling far short and yet we’re talking about spending billions of pounds, this is a huge amount of money and it just seems unbelievably self-indulgent.”

It comes as Rees-Mogg told the chamber that MPs will be expected to decide in 2023 exactly how much taxpayers cash they are willing to funnel to the project.

But there is disagreement over whether when the refurbishment begins, there should be a partial or full decant from Parliament, with Rees-Mogg suggesting MPs will need to think about the extent to which ­virtual participation in proceedings can be utilised while the works take place.

Rees-Mogg said he has no opposition to a full decant “if it were nobler in the mind to suffer it”, but said it must represent the best value for money.

However, Blackman slammed the partial decant proposal and suggested that MPs who back it were only looking at the issue from their own ­perspective.

She said: “I genuinely believe ­billions of pounds of public money is being wasted on doing things like looking at a significant foothold in the chamber, I make no apologies for prejudging that. I do not think it would be sensible to keep the ­chamber, if the rest of the House of Commons was decanted.

“I can’t imagine why anybody would possibly think that’s a good idea, unless they were looking at this from the point of view of themselves wanting to appear in the chamber.”

Blackman added that the chamber for most of the public is somewhere they regard as “stuffy” and that many Scottish constituents, hers included, will not have been anywhere near the chamber.

She said: “It is not somewhere that everybody has got that deep feeling of love for, and I think it’s something the general public could do without for quite a period of time during the course of the decant.

“I think that certainly the significant foothold is a daft route to go down, but I also think that … democracy can function properly in a room where people can vote with buttons, that is still a democracy. We don’t have to troop through a lobby in order for this to be considered a ­democracy.”

Blackman finished by saying that priorities for the restoration must be keeping costs low, making the parliament more accessible and making sure the refurbishment is as carbon neutral as possible.

Rees-Mogg also insisted the project must be focused on “vital” works rather than result in “wasteful and ridiculous excess”, noting: “Our more modest requirement is merely that our democracy should be able to function properly during the period of works and thereafter.”

Labour, shadow Commons leader Thangam Debbonaire said taxpayers want money spent “wisely”.