JFKvsNixon Posted June 21, 2015 Share Posted June 21, 2015 My question would be why they shouldn't move out when there are places that could accommodate them and spare us as taxpayers a bigger bill.They really are something else. If I tried to let a contract that allowed for what they are proposing to do I'd get a royal telling off for not achieving value for money for the Exchequer. As usual do as I say not as I do Who's to say that they're not going to move out of Westminster whist it's being developed? I don't think that the discussion has really begun, let along any conclusion reached. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annbaker Posted June 21, 2015 Share Posted June 21, 2015 Who's to say that they're not going to move out of Westminster whist it's being developed? I don't think that the discussion has really begun, let along any conclusion reached. Ah but if they do will they stay in London - very expensive- or set a good example and move up north and join the rest of us mere mortals? I know which one my money's on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted June 21, 2015 Share Posted June 21, 2015 (edited) Ah but if they do will they stay in London - very expensive- or set a good example and move up north and join the rest of us mere mortals? I know which one my money's on! It would be a lot less expensive to stay in London than it would be to move Parliament and Government, and all it's infrastructure somewhere else. What you are talking about is in effect moving the capital, which would be a very expensive undertaking. Edited June 21, 2015 by JFKvsNixon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annbaker Posted June 21, 2015 Share Posted June 21, 2015 It would be a lot less expensive to stay in London than it would be to move government, and all it's infrastructure somewhere else. I can only speak for DWP because that's where I work but actually it wouldn't. Given we're all over the country already the infrastructure is there. Most people in Head Office like myself have laptops because they're out and about. In comparitive terms a lot cheaper to move out of London which is why we do have sites outside of the capital. A programme started in the 90s so they could get rid o costly estate in London. HMRC have done similar and indeed we share a massive site with them in Newcastle. We're the two biggest depts so if we did it the others can too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poppet2 Posted June 21, 2015 Share Posted June 21, 2015 I wonder if they would object to a large building in The Bahamas for a few years until the work is completed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted June 21, 2015 Share Posted June 21, 2015 I can only speak for DWP because that's where I work but actually it wouldn't. Given we're all over the country already the infrastructure is there. Most people in Head Office like myself have laptops because they're out and about. In comparitive terms a lot cheaper to move out of London which is why we do have sites outside of the capital. A programme started in the 90s so they could get rid o costly estate in London. HMRC have done similar and indeed we share a massive site with them in Newcastle. We're the two biggest depts so if we did it the others can too! The head offices would have to move, you couldn't have a situation where it would take hours to move from the Foreign Office to parliament then back again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
annbaker Posted June 21, 2015 Share Posted June 21, 2015 (edited) I wonder if they would object to a large building in The Bahamas for a few years until the work is completed? Grand idea! get rid of em ---------- Post added 21-06-2015 at 18:03 ---------- The head offices would have to move, you couldn't have a situation where it would take hours to move from the Foreign Office to parliament then back again. They would have to move. Head office staffing levels in London are not high. FO staff aren't primarily based in London any more than other Govt Depts are. We all did the big move out in the 90s basically as a cost cutting exercise. Education went to Darlington, we had Blackpool, Newcastle and Sheffield, HMRC Telford and Newcastle etc etc We all have the infrastructure from an IT aspect to work anywhere. Once you're set up on your own depts network which happens on your first day, you can pretty much work anywhere including from home. Edited June 21, 2015 by annbaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Arthur Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 Just saying. It might be more than £6 billion. On the upside, the likely location for the temporary House of Commons is a sharia investment so there won't be any bars in the building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stoned Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jan/26/palace-of-westminster-refurbishment-could-see-mps-and-peers-relocated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamston Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 It makes more common sense for the work to be do sooner rather than later and for the building to be empty when the work is being done . The lower figures are still a staggering amount of money which always seems to be the case for the cost of work on public buildings . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now