Conclusions and recommendations
Introduction
1. Parliament
is a working institution, and while we are committed to the development
of facilities for visitors, the provision of facilities that enable
the House and its Members to operate effectively must take precedence.
(Paragraph 5)
2. We welcome the
recent improvements to some of the services available to the public,
and now consider the extent to which they should be developed
further. (Paragraph 30)
What should Parliament provide for its visitors?
3. The
Palace of Westminster is not a museum; it is the home of a working
Parliament. Visitor facilities should not compromise the efficiency
and effectiveness of Parliament's work. The United Kingdom public
is entitled to see their Parliament in action and to expect an
open welcome with guidance and information to make their visit
productive and memorable. However, the severe pressure on accommodation
within the Parliamentary Estate means that it is necessary for
us to prioritise among our visitors. (Paragraph 37)
4. We acknowledge
that to "do nothing" is not an acceptable option. The
Houses' core objectives of promoting public knowledge and understanding
of the work and role of Parliament could not be achieved in the
context of current services provided to visitors, particularly
those provided by the Parliamentary Education Service which are
already at capacity. As Parliament promotes the limited facilities
and resources it has to offer, the demand for visitor services
provided by the website, Education Service and Information Offices
is likely to increase beyond current capacity. The Education Service
in particular will not be able to continue to expand its services
without a dedicated teaching space. (Paragraph 43)
5. To do nothing would
bring into question Parliament's commitment, through its strategic
plans, to improving the public's knowledge of its work. In our
judgment, such an approach would fail to respond both to the scale
of the physical challenge we face at Westminster in handling the
large number of school visitors, and to the political task of
re-engaging with school groups and other young people for whom
Parliament may be remote and difficult to understand. Some improvement
in services is necessary in order to provide both a signal of
commitment and an opportunity to deliver substantial change. It
is important that Parliament is not seen as exclusive, unwilling
to open up and welcome the citizens who pay for its upkeep. This
could be damaging to the reputation of Parliament. (Paragraph
44)
6. We consider that
at the cost estimated by the Feasibility Report and Options Appraisal,
published as an appendix to this Report, a new build visitor centre
would not represent value for money. In reaching this conclusion,
the Committee agreed to look again at the prioritisation of visitors
to Parliament and to decide how best to improve visitor facilities
without the construction of a new building. (Paragraph 47)
7. We are most likely
to be successful in engaging with the public if we focus on those
visitors we most want to reach and on what Parliament already
does well (Paragraph 49)
8. It is important
that we engage voters of the future in the work and role of Parliament
in order to promote a lifetime's interest and participation in
the democratic process. The best way to reach most young people
is within an organised learning environment, with direct relevance
to what they are being taught every day in the classroom. (Paragraph
55)
9. The House of Commons
Commission has stated that in terms of visitor services: "visits
conducted under the auspices of the Education Service should in
principle be prioritised": we agree. We believe that the
highest priority for an improvement in visitor services must be
to provide dedicated facilities for educational groups. (Paragraph
56)
10. New educational
facilities should be designed principally for school groups. But
providing facilities flexible enough to be used for activities
involving young people visiting other than through schools could
allow for a fuller use of the space outside of term time. (Paragraph
58)
11. There is scope
for Parliament to provide better facilities for all those interested
in visiting. However, in the current climate of pressure on accommodation
and in the interests of concentrating resources where they are
most needed, we do not favour the allocation of a new dedicated
space to any category of visitor other than educational groups.
(Paragraph 61)
12. The redevelopment
of the Parliamentary website provides an ideal opportunity to
make information more accessible for people interested in the
democratic process and how Parliament works, and in the cultural
heritage of the Palace of Westminster, particularly for those
who are unable, or disinclined, to visit Parliament. (Paragraph
62)
13. It is clear from
the information provided to us that provision for visitors at
Westminster has fallen behind other Parliaments and Assemblies,
both in the United Kingdom and abroad. (Paragraph 63)
What should be provided in the dedicated educational
facilities?
14. We
do not consider that the request for more learning space is over
ambitious in view of the current demand for the Education Service's
services and the planned programmes of outreach. We agree that
the facilities as described in paragraphs 74 and 78 would provide
an educational space that would go further to meet the needs of
students, teachers and Members than the current allocation of
space. (Paragraph 85)
15. Based on the evidence
to us from London Museums and on our discussions with the Education
Service and the Central Tours Office, it is apparent that our
current provision for educational visitors is impractical and
uncomfortable for both staff and visitors. A real improvement
in the experience of learners could be made by the provision of
dedicated space. It would signal that Parliament has a real commitment
towards engagement with the public. (Paragraph 87)
16. If a dedicated
space is to be provided, advantage should also be taken of the
opportunity to expand significantly Parliament's capacity to welcome
educational visitors. (Paragraph 88)
17. Accordingly we
recommend that a dedicated space for school visitors of approximately
1,000m² (consisting of flexible accommodation of five classrooms
with ancillary space for storage, toilet facilities, a lunch area
and locker space) should be sought either on or off the existing
Estate—the exact space depending on what becomes available
and at what cost. We understand that the House of Lords Information
Committee supports this recommendation. (Paragraph 89)
18. We accept that
in order to provide a dedicated space for the Education Centre
either certain offices on the existing Estate will need to be
displaced into new accommodation and the space reconfigured, or
new accommodation will have to be acquired. There will be costs
associated with both options. (Paragraph 90)
19. We recommend that
identifying a suitable space for the Education Service should
be included within the 25 year Estates strategy, as part of the
accommodation strategy. We recommended the development of this
strategy in our Report on House of Commons Accommodation, to manage
and identify accommodation priorities on the Parliamentary Estate.
Providing dedicated facilities for school parties should be a
high priority but must not impact adversely on the needs of Members
for adequate office accommodation within the Parliamentary Estate.
(Paragraph 91)
20. A dedicated space
for education in Parliament would provide a facility for Members
of the House of Commons to develop the link between Parliament
and their constituents. It would need to develop as a resource
available to Members and their staff to interact with school groups
and other learners, to communicate the work and role of Parliament.
(Paragraph 92)
21. We recommend that
the Parliamentary Education Service and the Central Tours Office
should develop specifically tailored Members' Tours for schools
and that more guides should be curriculum trained to ensure school
children gain the most benefit from their visit to Parliament.
Five times as many children participate in tours as are able to
participate in a Parliamentary Education Service programme. Tailored
tours are an ideal opportunity for Parliament to engage with school
children and increase their awareness of its work. These tours
could be implemented quickly, in advance of any dedicated accommodation
being found for the Education Service. (Paragraph 93)
22. Members are reminded
that they should give advance warning that their tour group consists
of school children in order to enable the Central Tours Office
to provide a tour that has a specific link to the relevant curriculum
and that is pitched at the right level. (Paragraph 94)
23. Facilities that
are offered at Westminster should be made as accessible as possible
to schools from all over the United Kingdom. (Paragraph 98)
24. We recommend that
the Finance and Services Committee and House of Commons Commission,
working closely with the appropriate bodies in the House of Lords,
should consider the case for subsidising school visits to Westminster
from more remote constituencies alongside the proposals to provide
dedicated facilities for the Parliamentary Education Service.
We believe that subsidies should be linked to learning requirements
to ensure that the Education Service is able to monitor the effectiveness
of their teaching programmes. (Paragraph 99)
25. We recommend that
the Group on Information for the Public should develop concrete
costed proposals for a pilot scheme of regional outreach officers
for consideration by the relevant committees before the Summer
Recess 2007. (Paragraph 100)
26. We recommend that
improved education facilities at Westminster should be complemented
by use of the website and development of links with groups that
have been identified as particularly disengaged from Parliament.
This will ensure that members of these groups as well as schools
are able to benefit from the resources available at Westminster
and engage with Parliament whether or not they are able to visit.
(Paragraph 105)
Conclusion
27. There
has been a growing recognition that much of the public has little
awareness of what we as Parliamentarians do, how Parliament works
and how to find out more. (Paragraph 106)
28. We have examined
the feasibility of an off-site Parliamentary Visitor and Information
Centre. We consider that a full-scale visitor centre would prove
a costly venture which could run the risk of becoming an expensive
tourist attraction for overseas visitors interested in the heritage
aspects of the Westminster area rather than providing a resource
for visitors wishing to learn more about the role and work of
Parliament itself. We share the views of the Select Committee
on Modernisation of the House of Commons and the House of Commons
Commission that the focus of visitor services should be on educational
visitors as the most productive way to improve Parliament's engagement
with the public. (Paragraph 108)
29. We believe that
a dedicated space for educational visitors, on or off the existing
Estate, would offer better value for money and would enable the
Education Service to develop exciting programmes and workshops
to engage learners and encourage them to discover more about the
work of Parliament. A dedicated space for learning could be developed
as a resource for Members to interact with students from their
constituencies through the programmes run by the Education Service
and provide support to Members' staff organising tours for schools.
A decision by the House to endorse our recommendations to proceed
with a dedicated space for the Education Service would set in
train more detailed design work and planning discussions so that
a precise and costed proposal could be brought back to us and
to the House of Commons Commission in due course in consultation
with appropriate bodies in the House of Lords. (Paragraph 109)
30. If we are to develop
our education and visitor facilities to enable Parliament to reach
out to schools and provide greater support for all learners of
all ages, we should invest in a dedicated space and provide the
support to do so. The development of this space should be part
of a wider programme, to include outreach and a redeveloped website,
of making Parliament and its work more accessible and better understood.
(Paragraph 110)
| 
