LIST OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee considers that it would be appropriate
to re-open the Line of Route to the public during the Summer Adjournment,
and therefore recommends that such a re-opening should take effect
from 31 July 2000, subject to the re-opening taking into account
three fundamental considerations:
- The Palace of Westminster is primarily a place
of work, and public access to it must not impinge upon that work;
- visiting arrangements during the recess must
not constrain either the Parliamentary works programme, or the
ability of either House to sit at any time it may be necessary
to do so; and
- current rights of Members of both Houses, and
of the Parliamentary Education Unit, to sponsor visits must be
maintained. (Paragraph 6).
The Committee recommends that tours should
follow the route currently taken by visitors between 9.30 am and
12 noon, provided neither House is sitting, ie:
Norman Porch — Queen's Robing Room —
Royal Gallery — Prince's Chamber — Chamber of the
House of Lords — Peers' Lobby and Corridor — Central
Lobby — Commons' Corridor and Lobby — Chamber of the
House of Commons — return to Central Lobby — St Stephen's
Hall — Westminster Hall — leaving by New Palace Yard.
(Paragraph 7).
The Committee recommends that groups equipped
with individual audioguides, with a commentary available in different
languages, would be the most appropriate visitor management system
for the Line of Route, in conjunction with a system of timed ticketing.
(Paragraph 11).
The Committee considers that the work involved
with managing the Line of Route would be too onerous for existing
staff to be able to incorporate into their present duties, and
therefore recommends that a discrete visitors' office, serving
both Houses, be established within the Department of the Serjeant
at Arms, with appropriate staffing of a Visitor Manager, an Assistant
Manager and a secretary. (Paragraph 14).
The Committee considers that many visitors,
at the end of their tour, would wish to ask questions about what
they have seen, how Parliament works, etc; and therefore recommends
that suitably knowledgeable staff should be available at the end
of the tour in order to assist with visitors' enquiries. (Paragraph
15).
The Houses of Parliament are neither a museum
nor an art gallery; they are a working legislature, and the Committee
considers it important to stress that admission charges would
apply only during the 8 or so weeks of the Summer Adjournment
and would only serve to recover the incremental costs of the summer
opening programme over a 5-year period. For over 42 weeks of the
year therefore, visitors would still be able to participate in
tours of the Palace of Westminster, meet their constituency MP
or Members of the House of Lords, listen to debates in both Chambers
when either or both Houses are sitting, and attend meetings of
Standing and Select Committees free of charge. Even during the
Summer Adjournment, Members of both Houses would continue to be
able to bring in their guests. It is not, nor has it ever been,
proposed that members of the public should be charged to see the
Houses of Parliament "at work". (Paragraph 20).
The Committee recommends that, in order that
the two Houses might recover all capital and running costs within
five years, visitors should be charged at an appropriate rate.
The admission charge would include a colour information leaflet
and the use of an audioguide. (Paragraph 22).
|
