Question

To ask the Senior Deputy Speaker whether it was assessed that the new security fence outside the House of Lords amounted to “substantial harm” or “less than substantial harm” to the Palace of Westminster as a Grade I Listed Building; if “less than substantial harm”, where within the range of “less than substantial harm” the harm falls.

I am informed that the assessment of harm was conducted by the bicameral Strategic Estates department of Parliament and submitted to Westminster City Council as part of the planning application.

Westminster City Council, through the planning process, recognised that the fence would cause some harm to designated heritage assets, but in its design and due to the temporary nature of the proposal, this harm was assessed to be less than substantial and in the low to moderate end of that spectrum.

In circumstances of less than substantial harm, the proposals must be justified and the public benefits of the scheme considered. In this case, the justification of providing a secure perimeter to the palace was considered by Westminster City Council to be compelling and the public benefits of providing a greater level of security to both the building and its users is assessed to outweigh the harm caused.