Memorandum by the Inter-Parliamentary
Union British Group
The British Group of the Inter-Parliamentary
Union (BGIPU) is a frequent user of the House's refreshment facilities.
The Group invites a great number of overseas parliamentarians
to visit Westminster and hosts approximately 40 official functions
each year. These range in size from large Speaker's dinners all
the way down to 14 covers in dining room "D". We are
also frequent users of the Churchill room and the Terrace Pavilion
for smaller groups of invitees. Our bookings are always made in
the name of the Member who is hosting the function.
In general, because of our long lead-in times,
we do not experience too much difficulty in booking a suitable
function room but it is virtually impossible to find a room at
short notice in the event of a late change of date. In our opinion
the dining facilities, with the exception of the Speaker's Apartments,
tend to be cramped and uncomfortable. The waiters are invariably
courteous but the food is served at such a pace that one often
feels quite rushed. Overall the facilities do little to enhance
the reputation of the Westminster parliament. Visiting dignitaries,
who generally have great respect for their cuisine, seldom comment
on the fare.
In addition to the above we also host a number
of luncheon or evening functions in the IPU room off Westminster
Hall. The Refreshment Department catered all these events in the
past. However, in recent years we have moved to outside caterers
primarily because the quality of the finger food from the Refreshment
Department simply wasn't good enough. The quality of the food
on offer now has improved to the extent that our guests from within
the House often ask us to recommend our caterers. Also the House's
refreshment facilities hire charges are more expensive than competitors
from without.
IPU STAFF COMMENTS
IPU members of staff appreciate the use of the
Adjournment restaurant on Thursday evening and Friday lunchtime
as well as use of the Millbank brasserie.
As regards the other facilities on offer their
preference is for the Debate cafeteria not only for the ambience
of the Atrium which is indeed a very attractive place to dine
but mainly for its innovative menus. The Terrace cafeteria is
their alternative choice. However, the fact that both venues are
extremely crowded often deters them from using the facilities
at all, especially as the type of food on offer in the other two
cafeterias, 1 Parliament Street and Millbank, is unattractive
to them. The pressure on the two venues of choice is undoubtedly
exacerbated by the extremely limited facilities provided in the
House of Lord's and the recent closure of the Westminster Hall
cafeteria.
CONCLUSIONS
Your press notice does not ask for comments
on the quality of food on offer in the dining rooms or cafeterias
but I think you will gather from the foregoing that, in our opinion,
it does have some bearing on the matter. Good quality food, accompanied
by good service, will always win out over location. If standards
were to be raised and more evenly applied throughout the estate
then we believe it would have a consequential effect on distribution
of demand.
We use the facilities a lot, and we would be
reluctant to see any change to the current code for access rights.
Similarly, we believe pricing mechanisms would send out the wrong
message and there is an obligation on the House to provide cafeteria
type food at a reasonable price especially for junior members
of staff.
A representative of the IPU would be happy to
appear before the Committee to give oral evidence.
Kenneth Courtenay
Secretary
12 March 2002
| 
