Delays to the restoration of the Palace of Westminster could add an estimated £420 million a year to the cost of repairing Parliament, MPs have warned, amid concerns that deteriorating infrastructure could cause a catastrophic incident, endanger lives and disrupt democratic institutions. The House of Commons Public Accounts Committee issued the warning on 4 November 2026, urging Parliament to make long-delayed decisions about the future of the historic building.
Each year of delay could add £420 million
The committee warns that each additional year of delay could add approximately £420 million to the eventual cost of the Restoration and Renewal Programme. Delaying the parliamentary vote until the end of 2026, after it had been expected before Easter, could cost up to £290 million. These are estimates of the costs of delay, not expenditure already incurred. The National Audit Office previously estimated an annual cost of delay of between £320 million and £420 million.
Catastrophic safety risks
The Palace requires extensive restoration to address ageing mechanical and electrical systems, fire hazards, asbestos and deteriorating historic fabric. The committee warns that without action the building could continue in managed decline or suffer a major incident. Chairman Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown raised the possibility of a serious fire and the failure of essential services during major parliamentary occasions. These are risk warnings, not predictions of a particular incident.
Maintenance spending continues to rise
Parliament currently spends approximately £1.5 million a week maintaining the Palace, with the cost expected to rise to £2 million weekly. Routine maintenance is needed to keep the building operational but cannot replace comprehensive repairs. The Grade I-listed Palace forms part of a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
Multibillion-pound decision for MPs and peers
Parliament must choose how the work should be carried out, including whether both Houses temporarily leave the Palace or refurbishment proceeds in stages while parliamentary activity continues in parts of the building. Previous estimates suggested a full relocation could cost roughly £11 billion to £16 billion and take up to 24 years, while a staged approach could cost considerably more and take decades longer. These are estimates, not approved final budgets. The committee has not endorsed a particular option.
£3 billion initial programme faces scrutiny
Parliament is considering an initial package of enabling and preparatory works capped at £3 billion, including £500 million in contingency. The committee says costs remain to be established for riverside security, the relocation of essential services and restoration of the medieval Cloister Court. MPs want greater clarity about the remaining contingency and the programme’s overall affordability.
Temporary accommodation behind schedule
Current plans envisage the House of Commons moving to Parliament’s Northern Estate and the House of Lords to the Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre. The committee warns that Northern Estate refurbishment is delayed and the conference centre acquisition is progressing more slowly than required. The restoration programme does not currently control all temporary accommodation arrangements, raising concerns about accountability and delivery.
Only 43% of MPs engaged
By June 2026, the programme’s Client Team had engaged around 43% of sitting MPs about Restoration and Renewal. The committee says this is insufficient for decisions that will affect parliamentary operations and spending for decades. It wants a stronger engagement plan for MPs, peers and staff, including newly elected members after the next general election.
Committee calls for dedicated oversight
The Public Accounts Committee wants clearer responsibilities, stronger cost estimates and greater transparency. It has called for Government proposals for a dedicated Restoration and Renewal select committee to scrutinise spending and delivery. Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown warned that postponement adds costs and leaves serious risks unresolved, while acknowledging that all available options involve substantial expenditure.
Parliament says safety work continues
A parliamentary spokesperson welcomed the committee’s scrutiny and said work was already taking place across the estate to ensure the safety of people working in and visiting the Palace. Responsibility for the main restoration decisions rests with Parliament, rather than being solely a decision for Government ministers.
What happens next?
MPs and peers are expected to consider narrowing the restoration options and approving preparatory works. Further decisions on the main programme are expected later in the decade. The committee wants greater certainty over temporary accommodation, unresolved costs and oversight before substantial commitments are made. Its central warning is that delay itself carries financial and safety consequences.