Parliamentary Works Estimates Commission

This session scrutinised the Restoration and Renewal (R&R) Delivery Authority’s main estimates for 2026/27, focusing on cost, schedule, governance, and oversight for the Palace of Westminster refurbishment. Key government commitments and positions include: debates on costed proposals remain a Government decision, with ministers noting it is “up to the Government” and the Leader of the House’s radar; the costed proposals indicate a £3 billion cap for phase 1 and a expectation of future parliamentary approvals to proceed. The committee highlighted the cost of delay (£70m per year in current prices plus £250m-£350m inflation) and the importance of timely debates to protect the programme timeline and avoid material impacts on procurement and temporary accommodation. Witnesses asserted multiple layers of scrutiny (DA Board, Client Board, NAO VfM inquiries, PAC) and stressed governance Ongoing dialogue with Treasury, while acknowledging concerns about Treasury tone in a recent letter. They urged governance evolution (technical/Programme Board) to maintain bicameral oversight and to manage complexity as the programme moves from planning to delivery. The session underscored significant digital-infrastructure spend (about £115m, 21% of DA costs), the rationale for that spend given discovery risks, and the need for robust controls as procurement ramps up. Overall, witnesses emphasised the necessity of a programme of R&R, the risk of cost escalation if decisions are delayed, and the imperative of sustained scrutiny and transparency. 2026-04-29

The committee scrutinised the Restoration and Renewal (R&R) programme’s progress, governance, funding, and risk management as it relates to the Parliamentary Works Grant main estimates for 2025-26. Key government commitments and positions include: publishing costed proposals and related information to the Houses by autumn 2025 (subject to parliamentary decision-making), publishing an Independent Advice and Assurance Panel report before the summer feeding into costed proposals, and maintaining health and safety priorities with independent assurance confirming all three options could be delivered in principle (with a full decant deemed safest). The witnesses outlined the timetable for presenting options to Parliament by year-end, the ongoing work to align cost, risk, and delivery responsibilities, and the Treasury’s ongoing but non-dominant role in the spending review context. They also acknowledged value-for-money considerations from phase-1 spend, the ongoing data/digital overhaul, and the plan to start construction activities in the late 2020s contingent on Parliament’s decisions. The session additionally explored governance for phase-2 arrangements, potential legislation implications, and the realities of coordinating across the Delivery Authority and Strategic Estates.