Tenth Report - Restoration and Renewal of Parliament

Select Committee
Public Accounts Committee HC 49 29 June 2022
Report Status Government responded
Conclusions & Recommendations 40 items (11 recs)
Source View on Parliament website
Government Response (AI assessment · 40 of 40 classified)
Accepted 22
Accepted in Part 1
Acknowledged 12
Deferred 4
Not Addressed 1
Government response
Treasury minutes: Government response to the Committee of Public Accounts on the Tenth report from Session 2022-23 · published 2 Sep 2022
Read the government response ↗ Response on the tracker

Recommendations & Conclusions

40 results
2 Recommendation Deferred
The House of Commons Commission proposed to dissolve the Sponsor Body without considering why governance...
Recommendation
The House of Commons Commission proposed to dissolve the Sponsor Body without considering why governance arrangements did not work and potential alternatives, including whether the House administrations can satisfactorily oversee work. Following a discussion of the indicative cost and schedule … Read more
Government Response Summary
The recommendation is directed to Parliament to consider appropriate governance arrangements. The Commissions have provided a report to both Houses in order to support their decision-making, taking into account advice from an Independent Advice and Assurance Panel.
HM Treasury
View Details
3 Recommendation Acknowledged
Critical value for money risks, which we have previously highlighted, have still not been addressed.
Recommendation
Critical value for money risks, which we have previously highlighted, have still not been addressed. The NAO’s January 2022 report found that risks we identified in our October 2020 report remained. This included the Sponsor Body managing factors outside its … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments agree with the Committee’s recommendation to ensure the relevant authorities address the recommendations made in previous PAC and NAO reports, though note it is for both Houses to ultimately agree the programme’s objectives and requirements, stating that the new two-tier governance structure is the proposed method.
HM Treasury
View Details
4 Recommendation Accepted
The Commissions have asked for further options to be explored but is unclear how the...
Recommendation
The Commissions have asked for further options to be explored but is unclear how the higher costs, greater duration and added risks, including extraordinary health and safety risks, of a continued presence during the building works can be managed. The … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerks agreed with the recommendation to set out the threshold of risk they are willing to accept, stating that risk management processes are already in place, and the Sponsor Body and Delivery Authority accepted the recommendation to progress the intrusive surveys, stating that they are on track to start in July 2022.
HM Treasury
View Details
5 Recommendation Accepted
To date, there has been a failure of transparency and accountability over work to restore...
Recommendation
To date, there has been a failure of transparency and accountability over work to restore and renew the Palace. This includes: the House administrations being three months late sharing, in line with expected standards, information on a recent asbestos incident … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments agree with the Committee’s recommendation to ensure transparency over the Programme, stating that the revised safety escalation protocols were implemented on 6 April 2022 and will be reviewed. They have reviewed and updated the existing safety escalation arrangements, implemented improved protocols, delivered training to key staff, and scheduled further reviews.
HM Treasury
View Details
6 Recommendation Not Addressed
The Parliamentary Accounting Officers have not made clear whether the House authorities can deliver the...
Recommendation
The Parliamentary Accounting Officers have not made clear whether the House authorities can deliver the work envisaged by Parliament. We are concerned that the Clerks may feel constrained in sharing their professional views as Accounting and Corporate officers on what … Read more
Government Response Summary
The government's response provides lists of Treasury Minutes responses for previous sessions without addressing the specific recommendation about the Clerks making their expert advice available and writing to the Commons and Lords should they be tasked with delivering a programme which they cannot assure themselves is value for money.
HM Treasury
View Details
1 Conclusion Acknowledged
On the basis of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence...
Conclusion
On the basis of a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, we took evidence on the restoration and renewal of the Palace of Westminster (the Palace) from the Sponsor Body Chief Executive Officer, the Delivery Authority Chief Executive, the … Read more
Government Response Summary
The government welcomes the Public Accounts Committee’s report of 29 June 2022 “Restoration and renewal of Parliament” and thanks the Committee for its consideration of the topic.
HM Treasury
View Details
7 Conclusion Accepted
The Clerk of the House told us that every year the restoration and renewal of...
Conclusion
The Clerk of the House told us that every year the restoration and renewal of the Palace is delayed adds risk and cost such as through nugatory spending.18 In 2014, an independent assessment found delays to the decision may add … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Accounting Officers agree with the committee's finding, stating that processes are already in place within Parliament and the R&R bodies to avoid nugatory spend and ensure value for money, with the Sponsor Body committed to ongoing scrutiny of costs.
HM Treasury
View Details
8 Conclusion Accepted in Part
Since the start of 2016, there have been 25 fire incidents within the Palace and...
Conclusion
Since the start of 2016, there have been 25 fire incidents within the Palace and 13 incidents of falling masonry.22 Nearly two hundred years ago, in 1834, the historic Palace was destroyed by a fire following delay restoring the building.23
Government Response Summary
The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments agree with the committee's implied concern, stating risk management processes are already in place. They are implementing a new two-tier governance structure by year-end to further enhance risk management for the Palace's Restoration and Renewal works.
HM Treasury
View Details
9 Conclusion Accepted
In May 2022, the Clerk of the House of Commons told us that this period...
Conclusion
In May 2022, the Clerk of the House of Commons told us that this period of uncertainty was “highly corrosive and damaging” for retaining the vital expertise needed to develop the Programme.24 This echoed the Delivery Authority’s comments to us … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerks commit to implementing the recommendation by ensuring the Delivery Authority remains in place, assessing capability gaps within the sponsor function by the end of summer recess, developing TUPE proposals to retain staff, and establishing a skilled Programme Board as part of a new governance structure by the end of the year.
HM Treasury
View Details
10 Conclusion Acknowledged
In March 2022, the Delivery Authority had already lost some newly recruited staff and access...
Conclusion
In March 2022, the Delivery Authority had already lost some newly recruited staff and access to technical contractor expertise. Then, in May 2022, the CEO of the Sponsor Body announced her resignation, along with two other senior members of Sponsor … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments commit to implement this recommendation. The Delivery Authority will remain in place and independent and the CEO of the Delivery Authority will remain accountable for the skills and expertise to deliver the Programme.
HM Treasury
View Details
11 Conclusion Acknowledged
We questioned the Clerk of the House of Commons on the timeframes and Parliamentary processes...
Conclusion
We questioned the Clerk of the House of Commons on the timeframes and Parliamentary processes required to make any changes and provide more certainty. He told us that the House Commissions had sought additional assurance work ahead of a June … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerks commit to implement the recommendation where it is within their powers to do so. They note the timeframe for debates has been achieved, and that they are committed to meeting the indicative timeframe in the Commissions' Report, but that laying regulations is not within their control.
HM Treasury
View Details
12 Recommendation Accepted
The Commissions intend to put indicative resolutions based on this report to Members and Peers...
Recommendation
The Commissions intend to put indicative resolutions based on this report to Members and Peers before the summer 2022 recess. The Clerk of the House explained that formalising the Commissions’ proposal would require the Leader of the House of Commons … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments commit to implement this recommendation, where it is within their powers to do so, aiming to meet the Commissions’ timeframe for drafting the necessary regulations in autumn 2022.
HM Treasury
View Details
13 Recommendation Accepted
The Sponsor Body told us it has not estimated the costs associated with dissolving itself,...
Recommendation
The Sponsor Body told us it has not estimated the costs associated with dissolving itself, which will depend on what the changes to the governance arrangements and proposed work look like. Depending on their grade, its staff have notice periods … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Accounting Officers agree with the Committee’s recommendation. There are already processes in place within Parliament, the Sponsor Body and Delivery Authority to avoid nugatory spend when making investment decisions.
HM Treasury
View Details
14 Conclusion Deferred
In February 2022, the House of Commons Commission proposed that the sponsor function should transfer...
Conclusion
In February 2022, the House of Commons Commission proposed that the sponsor function should transfer to a “new, separate department serving both Houses”, with its head formally accountable to the Clerk of the House or the Clerks of both Houses … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Committee’s recommendation is for Parliament itself. It is therefore not for the Accounting Officers to give a substantive response.
HM Treasury
View Details
15 Conclusion Deferred
On 14 June 2022, the Commissions published the areas where they sought the Houses agreement.
Conclusion
On 14 June 2022, the Commissions published the areas where they sought the Houses agreement. This included that the Sponsor Body should be replaced, and that the sponsorship function, now termed client function, would be brought in-house to Parliament for … Read more
Government Response Summary
The government states that this recommendation is for Parliament itself and that it is therefore not for the Accounting Officers to give a substantive response. They note that the Commissions have provided a report to both Houses in order to support their decision-making.
HM Treasury
View Details
16 Recommendation Accepted
The Clerk of the House of Commons explained that the technical capacity needed to take...
Recommendation
The Clerk of the House of Commons explained that the technical capacity needed to take on the Sponsor Body’s role was well beyond anything within the House administrations’ in-house resource. He suggested there will need to be a professional client … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments commit to ensuring the new Client Team has the right skills and expertise, assessing capability and capacity gaps within the sponsor function, and applying TUPE legislation to mitigate the risk of losing staff.
HM Treasury
View Details
17 Conclusion Accepted
In terms of the Clerks’ role, Members of both Houses value their expertise in terms...
Conclusion
In terms of the Clerks’ role, Members of both Houses value their expertise in terms of procedural knowledge, but they may not have the requisite skills to oversee the delivery function (the Delivery Authority) in a complex programme with multiple … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments commit to implement this recommendation, and the Delivery Authority will remain in place and independent. An interim CEO will assess capability and capacity gaps within the sponsor function.
HM Treasury
View Details
18 Conclusion Accepted
We questioned the Clerk of the House of Commons on the House administration’s performance managing...
Conclusion
We questioned the Clerk of the House of Commons on the House administration’s performance managing similar programmes. The expected cost of the Elizabeth Tower refurbishment has roughly tripled, from £29 million set out in the outline business case in 2016 … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Sponsor Body and Delivery Authority accept the recommendation, stating that intrusive surveys are planned to commence in July 2022 and continue over several years. These surveys aim to provide crucial structural and asbestos information to inform future decisions on the Restoration and Renewal programme scope and delivery.
HM Treasury
View Details
19 Recommendation Accepted
We also questioned the House administrations’ protocols on how they to responded to safety incidents...
Recommendation
We also questioned the House administrations’ protocols on how they to responded to safety incidents during works.46 On 19 November 2021, contractors working in the Speaker’s private apartments identified a release of asbestos between 23 October and 27 October 2021.47 … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments agree with the Committee’s recommendation, noting that the revised safety escalation protocols were implemented on 6 April 2022 and will be reviewed in October 2022, with annual reviews thereafter.
HM Treasury
View Details
20 Conclusion Accepted
The Clerk of the House of Commons explained the House administrations stood down all works...
Conclusion
The Clerk of the House of Commons explained the House administrations stood down all works on the parliamentary estate on 9 February, in part to check whether the right protocols were in place and understood by the relevant staff.50 He … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments agree with the Committee’s conclusion, stating that the revised safety escalation protocols were implemented on 6 April 2022 and will be reviewed. They have reviewed and updated the existing safety escalation arrangements, implemented improved protocols, delivered training to key staff, and scheduled further reviews.
HM Treasury
View Details
21 Conclusion Accepted
The incident was formally reported to the Health and Safety Executive on 10 February 2022,...
Conclusion
The incident was formally reported to the Health and Safety Executive on 10 February 2022, with relevant trade unions informed on 15 February. The Clerk of the House of Commons acknowledged that the staff affected should have been contacted with … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments agree with the Committee’s recommendation, and the revised safety escalation protocols were implemented on 6 April 2022 with a further review scheduled for October 2022 to ensure they remain fit for purpose.
HM Treasury
View Details
22 Conclusion Deferred
In proposing to replace the Sponsor Body, the Commission did not set out what options...
Conclusion
In proposing to replace the Sponsor Body, the Commission did not set out what options were considered for the revised governance and how they differed from existing arrangements.54 The Sponsor Body told us that it has not been involved in … Read more
Government Response Summary
This recommendation is for Parliament, and initial options relating to the governance arrangements for the delivery phase of the programme will be considered as part of the strategic case put to Parliament. The Commissions have provided a report to both Houses in order to support their decision-making.
HM Treasury
View Details
23 Conclusion Acknowledged
In June 2022, the independent review panel recommended that bringing the sponsor function in-house should...
Conclusion
In June 2022, the independent review panel recommended that bringing the sponsor function in-house should be viewed as a pragmatic measure – the sponsor body governance model could be made to work but was unlikely to be viable given the … Read more
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledges the Panel's conclusion that the governance model for the delivery phase will need to be separately considered and confirmed after the scope and preferred delivery strategy is agreed, stating that governance structures will be considered in the development of the strategic case.
HM Treasury
View Details
24 Conclusion Accepted
The Clerk of the House told us that he expected the Infrastructure and Projects Authority...
Conclusion
The Clerk of the House told us that he expected the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA) to assure the arrangements but recognised that the IPA had no formal role over the Programme.60 Following our March evidence session, the Clerk clarified … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerks broadly agree with the committee's observations and commit to ensuring future Independent Advice and Assurance Panels will continue to consist of independent experts, and that their outcomes will be published subject to Commission agreement.
HM Treasury
View Details
25 Conclusion Accepted
When we reported on this Programme in October 2020, we found the Sponsor Body had...
Conclusion
When we reported on this Programme in October 2020, we found the Sponsor Body had not engaged sufficiently with Members, Peers, Officials, and staff to clarify how it would reconcile the range of individual views within Parliament. While the Sponsor … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerks agree with the committee, proposing a new two-tier governance structure for the R&R Programme by the end of the calendar year, which aims to develop a single set of objectives and requirements by engaging the parliamentary community and providing oversight through Programme and Client Boards.
HM Treasury
View Details
26 Conclusion Acknowledged
The Clerk of the House of Commons recognised the challenge of the Programme’s clients—including Members...
Conclusion
The Clerk of the House of Commons recognised the challenge of the Programme’s clients—including Members and the Commissions—not having a single voice.66 In our view, until Parliament can provide a clear steer on what it wants, it is almost impossible … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerks of both Houses agree with the Committee’s recommendation to achieve a single set of objectives and requirements, noting it is for both Houses to ultimately agree. The target implementation date for the new two-tier governance structure is the end of the calendar year, subject to endorsement by both Houses of Parliament.
HM Treasury
View Details
27 Conclusion Accepted
On 18 March, the Commissions issued a joint statement setting out nine parameters to guide...
Conclusion
On 18 March, the Commissions issued a joint statement setting out nine parameters to guide forthcoming decisions. This included considering further options to undertake work without decanting and looking at doing work over a shorter period. The statement reaffirmed the … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Sponsor Body CEO and the Delivery Authority CEO accept this recommendation, stating that plans for commencing intrusive surveys are on track to start in July 2022. These surveys will provide the Delivery Authority with key structural and ground condition information as well as adding to the existing records of asbestos.
HM Treasury
View Details
28 Conclusion Acknowledged
In our October 2020 report, we noted that success for the Programme depended on factors...
Conclusion
In our October 2020 report, we noted that success for the Programme depended on factors outside the Sponsor Body’s control.73 The NAO’s January 2022 report reported 64 Committee of Public Accounts, Restoration and renewal of the Palace of Westminster, Nineteenth … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerks of both Houses agree with the recommendation to achieve a single set of objectives and requirements, noting it is for both Houses to ultimately agree. The target implementation date for the new two-tier governance structure is the end of the calendar year, subject to endorsement by both Houses of Parliament.
HM Treasury
View Details
29 Conclusion Acknowledged
When we last examined the Programme, the House of Commons planned to decant to Richmond...
Conclusion
When we last examined the Programme, the House of Commons planned to decant to Richmond House, creating a temporary chamber.78 We heard that of the £70 million written off when the Commons decided not to pursue this plan, most was … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerks of both Houses agree with the Committee’s recommendation regarding risks of interdependent programmes, and the target implementation date for implementing the new two-tier governance structure is the end of the calendar year, subject to endorsement by both Houses of Parliament. The programme board will be the primary instrument for managing risks to the R&R programme, including those related to interdependent programmes.
HM Treasury
View Details
30 Conclusion Accepted
Until February 2022, the Sponsor Body was preparing a business case based on Parliament fully...
Conclusion
Until February 2022, the Sponsor Body was preparing a business case based on Parliament fully moving out of the Palace during the works (known as a ‘full decant’). In December 2020, the House of Commons Commission agreed to ask the … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Sponsor Body CEO and the Delivery Authority CEO accept this recommendation, stating that plans for commencing intrusive surveys are on track to start in July 2022. These surveys will provide the Delivery Authority with key structural and ground condition information as well as adding to the existing records of asbestos.
HM Treasury
View Details
31 Recommendation Accepted
The Sponsor Body returned to the Commissions with its initial analysis on the impact of...
Recommendation
The Sponsor Body returned to the Commissions with its initial analysis on the impact of a continued presence in January 2022.82 In the initial analysis, the Sponsor Body and Delivery Authority assumed that the Commons Chamber, alongside other functions requested … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Sponsor Body CEO and the Delivery Authority CEO accept the recommendation to progress the intrusive surveys during the summer to determine what the asbestos removal plan should be, including whether it is safe to remain in the Palace whilst these works take place, and this is already being implemented, with plans for commencing intrusive surveys on track to start in July 2022.
HM Treasury
View Details
32 Conclusion Accepted
In March 2022, the Delivery Authority explained to us that initial analysis showed that, although...
Conclusion
In March 2022, the Delivery Authority explained to us that initial analysis showed that, although technically possible, continued presence would lead to higher costs and 74 C&AG’s Report, para 3.24 75 C&AG’s Report, Figure 12 and para 3.27 76 C&AG’s … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments agree with the Committee’s recommendation regarding risk thresholds, stating that risk management processes are already in place. The Sponsor Body and Delivery Authority accepted the recommendation to progress the intrusive surveys, stating that they are on track to start in July 2022.
HM Treasury
View Details
33 Conclusion Acknowledged
The Delivery Authority has now been tasked with developing new options for undertaking the work...
Conclusion
The Delivery Authority has now been tasked with developing new options for undertaking the work that will involve some continued presence.87 We asked the Clerks if they could manage the risks to users of the building should the House of … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments agree with the Committee’s recommendation, and the articulation of threshold for risk during the works, acceptability of trade-offs and impact on the approach to works will accompany the strategic case that will be put to Parliament.
HM Treasury
View Details
34 Conclusion Accepted
In our May evidence session we asked the Delivery Authority whether, given its earlier analysis...
Conclusion
In our May evidence session we asked the Delivery Authority whether, given its earlier analysis of continued presence options, it was comfortable developing these current options. The Delivery Authority told us that it had agreed a task brief to respond … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Sponsor Body CEO and the Delivery Authority CEO accept the recommendation to progress the intrusive surveys during the summer to determine what the asbestos removal plan should be, including whether it is safe to remain in the Palace whilst these works take place, and this is already being implemented, with plans for commencing intrusive surveys on track to start in July 2022.
HM Treasury
View Details
35 Conclusion Acknowledged
Through our work we often see a lack of openness and transparency about programme progress,...
Conclusion
Through our work we often see a lack of openness and transparency about programme progress, performance and decision-making. In January 2021, we concluded it was vital that Parliament’s own major project, the Restoration and Renewal Programme, was an exemplar of … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments agree with the Committee’s recommendation regarding sponsor reporting, stating that quarterly R&R progress reports will continue to be published after the new two-tier governance structures are implemented.
HM Treasury
View Details
36 Conclusion Acknowledged
For government major programmes, Accounting Officers are expected to assess the delivery risks, publishing a...
Conclusion
For government major programmes, Accounting Officers are expected to assess the delivery risks, publishing a summary of this assessment, and seek a ministerial direction should they consider a decision they are being asked to implement compromises value for money.94 In … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerks broadly agree with the Committee’s recommendation and are aware of the importance of their roles as Accounting Officers. The government commits to publishing the outcome of any future Independent Advice and Assurance Panels that they commission subject to the agreement of the Commissions.
HM Treasury
View Details
37 Recommendation Accepted
Furthermore, the Commission has not yet set out its reason for suggesting the abolition of...
Recommendation
Furthermore, the Commission has not yet set out its reason for suggesting the abolition of the Sponsor Body.99 The Sponsor Body had set out indicative cost and time estimates for the work, and then heard about plans to abolish it … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments agree to set out the threshold of risk they are willing to accept during the works. The Sponsor Body CEO and the Delivery Authority CEO accept the recommendation to progress the intrusive surveys during the summer to determine the asbestos removal plan.
HM Treasury
View Details
38 Conclusion Acknowledged
To work quickly, Parliament and the Sponsor Body agreed that parliamentary domestic committees, such as...
Conclusion
To work quickly, Parliament and the Sponsor Body agreed that parliamentary domestic committees, such as the finance committees for each house who support the Commissions, would not scrutinise and endorse the Programme’s assessment of the Programme costs and the impact … Read more
Government Response Summary
The CEO of the Sponsor Body and the CEO of the Delivery Authority accept this recommendation and state that the domestic committees of the two Houses are key stakeholders and they intend to build on previous positive examples of engagement with domestic committees and will integrate engagement with them into future planning schedules.
HM Treasury
View Details
39 Conclusion Accepted
We reiterated that significant developments with the Programme should be fully in the public domain...
Conclusion
We reiterated that significant developments with the Programme should be fully in the public domain and received a commitment from the Clerk of the House, that the House will always be told when there is a significant development with the … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerk of the House and the Clerk of the Parliaments agree with the Committee’s recommendation, stating that the revised safety escalation protocols were implemented on 6 April 2022 and will be reviewed. They have reviewed and updated the existing safety escalation arrangements, implemented improved protocols, delivered training to key staff, and scheduled further reviews.
HM Treasury
View Details
40 Conclusion Accepted
Following the House administrations being three months late sharing information about a recent asbestos incident,...
Conclusion
Following the House administrations being three months late sharing information about a recent asbestos incident, the Clerk of the House acknowledged staff should have been notified earlier.108 We heard relevant trade union representatives were informed on 15 February, five days … Read more
Government Response Summary
The Clerks agree with the Committee’s recommendation, having implemented revised safety escalation protocols on 6 April 2022 and scheduled a review of their effectiveness for October 2022 with annual reviews thereafter.
HM Treasury
View Details