Shocking state of asbestos-ridden Houses of Parliament uncovered in new survey
At least 44 fires have broken out in the Houses of Parliament over the past decade, with more than 1,000 incidents of asbestos uncovered, figures have shown.
Concerns have been raised repeatedly that the iconic Westminster building could face a Notre-Dame style blaze if restoration work is not completed, with four fires in 2024 alone.
However, plans to restore the Palace of Westminster are likely to cost billions, with the fastest option likely to take more than a decade and would consist of both the House of Lords and Commons relocating on a temporary basis.
Details of the toxic materials were released to Labour peer Peter Hain, which showed that asbestos had been found in 1,057 items.
'Along with persistent and regular fire outbreaks – 44 recorded over the last 10 years – which could erupt at any time and burn down parliament, the whole Palace of Westminster is infested with asbestos,' Mr Hain told The Guardian.
'Over 1,000 cases of such a real and present danger to MPs, peers, staff and visitors have been identified. This iconic world heritage site should be decanted, renewed and restored as soon as possible, as both the Commons and Lords agreed years ago.
'We are otherwise working in a potential Notre Dame inferno compounded by a potentially lethal asbestosis threat.'
The report said that management surveys were monitoring the items to see if they needed to be removed.
Deputy Lords speaker John Gardiner confirmed in December that new plans for restoration would only be available later this year, which include three options, which includes a full relocation, a continued presence only for some parliamentarians, and a rolling programme of works.
However, it is likely to divide MPs as each of the plans cost billions, with the rolling programme of works likely to take up to 70 years.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wales Online
2 days ago
- Wales Online
The £6bn rail line argument that masks what you should be really angry about
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info Over the last few days, there has been one hot topic in the world of Welsh politics - a train line which will run between Oxford and Cambridge. Given these two cities are roughly 200 miles from Wales, you can be forgiven for asking why. East West Rail is a railway project which will link Oxford and Cambridge at an estimated cost of £6.6bn. Any money spent on it will trigger extra payments to Scotland and Northern Ireland so they can spend it on their transport systems. But, just as has been the case throughout the HS2 debacle, there won't be any extra money for the Welsh Government. The reason for this is both incredibly simple and reasonable on the surface but devillishly complicated and truly unfair beneath it. It may not necessarily be a scandal in itself. But it symbolises everything that is wrong with how rail funding is allocated in England and Wales. For our free daily briefing on the biggest issues facing the nation, sign up to the Wales Matters newsletter here On the face of it, this issue isn't linked to the spending review that has been happening in Westminster for the last six months or more and of which chancellor Rachel Reeves will stand up in the Commons on Wednesday and deliver the conclusion. Yet it helps shed a light on why that will be enormously complex to understand and why the real story may not be the one you read in headlines that evening. So bear with us while we go through it. The fury from politicians Opposition politicians in Wales have been fulminating about East West rail. They say that the rail line should have been classified as an England-only project like Crossrail so that the Welsh Government would get a guaranteed share. Lib Dem MP David Chadwick said Wales will lose out to the tune of between £306m and £363m as a result. Describing it as another HS2, he said: "Labour expects people across Wales to believe the ridiculous idea that this project will benefit them, and they are justified in not giving Wales the money it needs to improve our own public transport systems. 'It's a disgrace, and it shows there has been no meaningful change since in the way Wales is treated since Labour took power compared to the Conservatives." Plaid Cymru's leader Mr ap Iorwerth took a similar tack, telling plenary: "For all the talk of the UK Government acknowledging somehow that Welsh rail has been historically underfunded, this is some partnership in power." Yet, while there's a lot of truth to what they're saying, it's also much more complicated. Which is where the spending review comes in. Comparability factors There will be so many numbers in the paperwork that accompanies Wednesday's spending review that finding the most important ones isn't straightforward. Yet if you want to know just how much of the England and Wales transport pot is going to be sucked into paying for massive rail projects in England like HS2 (£66bn) or East West rail (£6bn) or all the tram/train projects being promised in England outside London (£15bn), then look out for the overall transport comparability factor for Wales. Very simply, this is the number that the Treasury uses to work out how much the Welsh Government should get for every £1 it spends on transport in England. The reason everyone has been so, so angry about HS2 and the massive billions being poured is that back in 2015, Wales used to get a comparability factor of 80.9%. Yet when the number crunchers in Horse Guards Road sat down to work out how much the Welsh Government should get at the last spending review in 2021, that comparability factor fell to just 33.5%. Ouch. For every £1 spent on transport by Westminster, since the last spending review the Welsh Government has received a population adjusted share (5%) of 33.5%. Or about 1.6p. For context, it used to be around 4p. If Mr Chadwick and Mr Iorwerth are right and the UK government plans to plough even more money into rail in England in the coming years on projects like HS2, East Coast and what the Tories used to call Northern Powerhouse rail, then the new comparability factor that the Treasury mathematicians will conjure up this time could be even lower. But even that is massively misleading. Because if the UK government also promises to plough vast sums into rail in Wales then the comparability factor for the Welsh Government would not rise - it would fall further still. Is your mind boggling yet? We said it was complex. What the Welsh Government wants Because the Welsh Government isn't responsible for rail infrastructure spending, the transport comparability factor really just reflects how much money is going on rail. The less that's spent on rail, the higher a share of the overall transport pot the Welsh Government gets. The more that goes on rail, the lower a share of the overall transport spot the Welsh Government gets. The real problem for Cardiff Bay then is not the comparability factor. Neither is it the fact that East West rail isn't classified as England-only. The problem, as far as the Welsh Government is concerned, is the fact that the England and Wales rail pot itself isn't shared fairly. HS2 and East Coast rail are the symbols of a system that is broken that pours vast sums into English rail projects while Wales misses out. Even if they were classified as England-only, the money would go to the Welsh Government which isn't responsible for rail infrastructure spending. "The way that the system operates at the moment—for years I've been saying—is redundant," Wales' transport minister Ken Skates has said. "The east-west line, which has been in development, I believe, for around about 20 years now, is part of the rail network enhancements pipeline, where everything in a large footprint, a substantial footprint, including Wales, is packaged together. "Where you have all schemes in England and Wales packaged together in what's called the regional network enhancement pipeline it means that projects in Wales are always going to be competing on the business case with projects in affluent areas of the south-east, of London. That means that we are at a disadvantage. "I want to see it change. I've been saying it for years. There's nothing new in this story. I've been saying that we need reform for years and suddenly people have woken up to it." Wales' First Minister Eluned Morgan has said the same. "What we have is a situation where there is a pipeline of projects for England and Wales. Are we getting our fair share? Absolutely not. Are we making the case? Absolutely." "I've made the case very, very clearly that, when it comes to rail, we have been short-changed, and I do hope that we will get some movement on that in the next week from the spending review," she said. What does this mean for the spending review When Rachel Reeves stands up in the Commons on Wednesday, we fully expect she will announce some funding for rail in Wales, as you can see in our piece here, and our expectation is that will be about the rail stations earmarked in the work by Lord Burns after the M4 relief road was axed. They would be in Cardiff East, Parkway, Newport West, Maindy, Llanwern and Magor. But what matters is how much and when - and how that compares to the money being spent in England. Imagine the chancellor announces a few hundred million pounds for those rail stations in Wales in the spending review, what we do not - and will likely not know for many years - is whether that amount is a fair reflection of the mass spending she has announced in England because we know she has also touted £15bn of improvements in England. It will likely take years for academics to assess what kind of share of the rail pot has been spent in Wales. In the past, it certainly has not been fair. In 2018, a Welsh Government commissioned report by Professor Mark Barry estimated that the Network Rail Wales route, which covers 11% of the UK network, received just over 1% of the enhancement budget for the 2011-2016 period. In 2021, the Wales Governance Centre told MPs on the Welsh affairs select committee that had rail been fully devolved to the Welsh Government, Wales would have received an additional £514m for enhancements via Network Rail had rail infrastructure been devolved as it is in Scotland. So when Leeds West and Pudsey MP Ms Reeves gets to her feet in the Commons on Wednesday, you can pretty much guarantee there will at least one or two headlines relevant Wales. But we may not understand what they really mean for a while yet and East West rail won't help us understand either.
North Wales Chronicle
2 days ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Playgrounds must be saved to stop children being ‘glued to screens', MPs say
A cross-party group of MPs are backing plans which would ensure town halls keep play parks in good order, while housing developers would be required to provide 'high quality, accessible, inclusive' areas for play on new build sites. The amendment to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill is expected to be considered when the legislation returns to the Commons on Monday. Some 49 MPs from the Labour Party, the Greens, and the Liberal Democrats, as well independents, have so far signalled their support for the amendment to the Bill, which would introduce a 'play sufficiency duty' in England. Similar measures already exist in Scotland and Wales, and require councils to regularly assess whether there are enough playgrounds and other play facilities in their areas. The amendment, introduced by Labour MP Tom Hayes, would also 'require new developments to provide high-quality, accessible, inclusive play opportunities which incorporate natural features and are integrated within broader public spaces', and could see councils withhold planning permission if new estates lead to a net loss of play areas. Mr Hayes, the MP for Bournemouth East, told the PA news agency: 'When playgrounds are left to rot, and we have the power to put things right, what message is that sending to families? 'New Clause 82 is a common-sense, no-cost way to protect the play spaces we have today and ensure developments in the future focus on children. 'England must join Scotland and Wales in providing a play sufficiency duty, and my amendment does just that.' In January, the Labour MP led a Westminster Hall debate on playgrounds, where he emphasised the importance of play to children's development and said the Government need to be on the 'side of playing children', as well as the 'side of working people' . The debate was the first of its kind in seven years, he said, and the longest in 17 years, when a national play strategy was introduced by the previous Labour government. Mr Hayes added: 'Children sitting GCSEs this year weren't even alive the last time a government, a Labour government, produced a national play strategy and funded playgrounds. 'Today children end up indoors, glued to screens because they don't have safe play spaces. For families on tight budgets, paying for indoor play isn't an option. 'They're left with bare patches of tarmac where a climbing frame should be, or rusted swing frames that only remind them of what used to be. 'Children growing up in cramped flats rely on playgrounds. My amendment supports their right to play and provides inclusive play areas for children with special educational needs and disabilities, too.' The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government was contacted for comment.
Powys County Times
3 days ago
- Powys County Times
Playgrounds must be saved to stop children being ‘glued to screens', MPs say
Playgrounds across England must be protected from being 'left to rot' so children can avoid being 'glued to screens', ministers have been told. A cross-party group of MPs are backing plans which would ensure town halls keep play parks in good order, while housing developers would be required to provide 'high quality, accessible, inclusive' areas for play on new build sites. The amendment to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill is expected to be considered when the legislation returns to the Commons on Monday. Some 49 MPs from the Labour Party, the Greens, and the Liberal Democrats, as well independents, have so far signalled their support for the amendment to the Bill, which would introduce a 'play sufficiency duty' in England. Similar measures already exist in Scotland and Wales, and require councils to regularly assess whether there are enough playgrounds and other play facilities in their areas. The amendment, introduced by Labour MP Tom Hayes, would also 'require new developments to provide high-quality, accessible, inclusive play opportunities which incorporate natural features and are integrated within broader public spaces', and could see councils withhold planning permission if new estates lead to a net loss of play areas. Mr Hayes, the MP for Bournemouth East, told the PA news agency: 'When playgrounds are left to rot, and we have the power to put things right, what message is that sending to families? 'New Clause 82 is a common-sense, no-cost way to protect the play spaces we have today and ensure developments in the future focus on children. 'England must join Scotland and Wales in providing a play sufficiency duty, and my amendment does just that.' In January, the Labour MP led a Westminster Hall debate on playgrounds, where he emphasised the importance of play to children's development and said the Government need to be on the 'side of playing children', as well as the 'side of working people' . The debate was the first of its kind in seven years, he said, and the longest in 17 years, when a national play strategy was introduced by the previous Labour government. Mr Hayes added: 'Children sitting GCSEs this year weren't even alive the last time a government, a Labour government, produced a national play strategy and funded playgrounds. 'Today children end up indoors, glued to screens because they don't have safe play spaces. For families on tight budgets, paying for indoor play isn't an option. 'They're left with bare patches of tarmac where a climbing frame should be, or rusted swing frames that only remind them of what used to be. 'Children growing up in cramped flats rely on playgrounds. My amendment supports their right to play and provides inclusive play areas for children with special educational needs and disabilities, too.'
