At the moment, the UK government is contemplating over the proposed renovation and restoration of Palace of Westminster – housing the Parliament of Great Britain. Refurbishing the houses of parliament is a large scale, elaborate project by anyone’s standards. However the cost of the proposed reconstruction is expected to top the staggering three billion pounds, which has raised more than a few eyebrows. Currently, Palace of Westminster is in anything but good shape, as the building itself is in need of major repair work, although this might not be too obvious at first glance. The projected cost of the renovation (the eye-watering three billion pounds mentioned above) has given some momentum to another suggestion – relocating the British seat of power, outside of London altogether. As outrageous as this might sound to some people, political analysts suggest decamping the British capital to another location would actually reassert Parliament’s authority, centralise power and possibly save a lot of taxpayer money. The idea of relocating the British capital has been around for some time, though now it has surfaced once again, and perhaps this time around it might fall on fewer deaf years than it has in the past.
The first time the proposal for removal of the British capital from London was officially voiced out was in twenty eleven. It was spurred by the centenary of relocating the capital of British India from Calcutta to Delhi. The supporters of the idea are pushed forward by an issue that has long plagued the UK – namely the drain of capital and resource, wealth and economic activity toward the south-west corner of the country. In other words, the London area is getting all the spoils, leaving crumbs for the rest of the kingdom. Now whether one supports or utterly rejects this, is matter of personal point of view, though there are indications that a ‘drain’ might indeed be going on. Another drive giving momentum to the proposal of relocating the UK capital is the growing strength of the separatist feel and philosophy spreading across Great Britain. Analysts suggest that a capital situated in a more central (politically correct) location might be shared and appreciated by more people, thus bringing the UK closer together. It is interesting to note that the large scale removal project plans to relocate the British capital to a specific location which is not a green-field site, but a rundown urban area. The idea is to build the ‘new’ British capital to its full might and glory over a decayed site as to give form and new hope to many people, respectively planting the new seed of belief in the values and principles on which Great Britain rests. Proposers of the relocation suggest West Bromwich as one of the possible sites as the area is strategically situated (in terms of transport infrastructure) yet it has the highest commercial property vacancy rate on its high streets – a symbolically suggested site indeed.
In the last four years, separatist and somewhat radical ideas and suggestions have been picking up speed and more and more people are jumping on the wagon. The uneven distribution of wealth between London area and other parts of the country, as well as the growing gap between property prices in London area and the rest of the UK are strong signals that something’s simmering down below, fuelling those separatist ideologies. The other factor is the ridiculous price tag of the renovation project proposed for Palace of Westminster – three billion pounds, money which is badly needed sectors of the economy and social welfare. There are expected to be even more additional costs as the current UK government is also looking to commission and convert a number of surrounding buildings to accommodate Parliament while the five year long renovation and restoration of Westminster is taking place. Leaders of National Trust have actually voiced out support toward the proposed removal of the capital from London. As per them, a British capital in the north of England is perhaps more politically and geographically adequate, as it would help correct and alleviate the metropolitan centralism of modern governments (to which the UK makes no exception really). A removal of the British capital from London would reassert Parliament as a popular congress of the United Kingdom as a whole. The main idea, National Trust goes on to say, is to once again create a true house of commons, not a congregation of the elite. Despite of all this, much of the discussion and proposals concerning the project have been viewed as temporary or dismissed as lacking any real substance. However, the need to balance out the economy in regional terms has become more and more apparent, even pressing in the last four years. One of the proposal schemes was to move only House of Lords to Leeds, and then think about relocation of more segments of the UK Parliament.
Removal of capitals from former sites to newly developed areas or pre-existing (more suitable) ones is nothing new. Not long ago the Egyptian government announced its plans to build an entirely new capital city from scratch in undeveloped parts of desert east of Cairo. The new capital city is expected to take five to seven years to complete, along with airports and all the bells and whistles. Depending on when the project is given the go ahead, Egyptian authorities expect to move in by the year two thousand twenty, ambitious but quite doable indeed. The new city will house most of the administrative and legislative bodies of Egypt, along with most of the foreign missions in the country. Cairo currently sits at twenty million population which is expected to double by the year twenty fifty. Just like London where overcrowding is also draining economic wealth and burdening many aspects of governing, Egypt too is looking to rebalance its economy through one of the largest proposed house removals in the world. In the early nineties, the Japanese government was also looking to relocate the capital outside of Tokyo. Driven by Japanese pragmatism and efficiency, the project aims to separate the capital of government from the capital of business – not a bad idea. Since then the project has gained much ground and rallied more support.
Removal of capitals from former sites to newly developed areas or pre-existing (more suitable) ones is nothing new. Not long ago the Egyptian government announced its plans to build an entirely new capital city from scratch in undeveloped parts of desert east of Cairo. The new capital city is expected to take five to seven years to complete, along with airports and all the bells and whistles. Depending on when the project is given the go ahead, Egyptian authorities expect to move in by the year two thousand twenty, ambitious but quite doable indeed. The new city will house most of the administrative and legislative bodies of Egypt, along with most of the foreign missions in the country. Cairo currently sits at twenty million population which is expected to double by the year twenty fifty. Just like London where overcrowding is also draining economic wealth and burdening many aspects of governing, Egypt too is looking to rebalance its economy through one of the largest proposed house removals in the world. In the early nineties, the Japanese government was also looking to relocate the capital outside of Tokyo. Driven by Japanese pragmatism and efficiency, the project aims to separate the capital of government from the capital of business – not a bad idea. Since then the project has gained much ground and rallied more support.