It was a mixed bag on Sky News early today with host Eammon Homes looking appalled when one guest suggested the old buildings be reassigned and a new parliament built. He was quick to point out the beauty of the building in a sunlight image but tell that to those facing income cuts by the government; tell that to a homeless person facing another night on the streets of London.
British democracy is failing fast. Allegations of dirty tricks and possible corruption in the May 2015 General Election are just the tip of the iceberg. PM David Cameron has promoted so many of his fat friends to the House or Lords they will soon be sitting in the daytime equivalent of bunk beds!
As they all squash in, for a price directly and indirectly, is the House of Lords necessary?
If the Commons needs a second House to make it accountable why not an elected one? The USA manages nicely with elected representatives in the Senate and Congress.
If parliament needs extended works to survive why not make it down to donations. Churches and other old buildings often have to complete works a little at a time as donations come in.
Move our dear MPS, Lords and Ladies and hangers on into a modern purpose built building so that work on the old houses of parliament can cost less and be done over time.
Tours of the old building as long as it passes health and safety regulations would help top up funds.
The new building could be modern to meet with 21st Century building regulations and it could be a 'new broom sweep.' Out could go some of the dodgy practices and taxpayer funded food and drink-in could come a streamlined parliament setting the austerity example for all.
Sometime in the near coming years members of parliament will have to vote on what to do next-restore and renovate or what?
A report in 2012 already warned the building could suffer "major, irreversible damage" without significant restoration work.
Either way there will be cost involved.
If MPs and peers are moved out for six years, the report claims the cost of renovation would drop to £3.5bn; how that works who knows.
The reduced costs will still include a new visitor centre, including exhibition, education, conference facilities and other additions.
Now that does not sound like urgent works does it?
As the Houses of Parliament are sinking slightly and known to still house asbestos perhaps simply costing for urgent and necessary works should be a priority? Better still move parliament out once and for all.