Committee publication · Correspondence · 18 December 2025
Note to Chair of Finance Committee - Elizabeth Tower Project, December 2025
Summary
A note to the Finance Committee Chair detailing the Elizabeth Tower refurbishment project outcome. The £85.5m project (approved budget £89m) completed in October 2023 after significant cost growth from initial estimates. Key drivers of increases: underestimated remedial works, site discoveries, clock mechanics outsourcing, and scaffolding complexity. Audits found no material errors in final accounts.
Key findings
- Project cost grew from £29.2m (OBC Feb 2016) to £85.5m outturn, with major increases in main works (£4.8m to £32.8m), scaffolding (£3.3m to £7.3m), and fees (£2.9m to £11.3m).
- Site discoveries (defective structure, lead paint, asbestos) and re-measurable works underestimation (stonework required four times original allowance) were principal cost drivers; inadequate intrusive surveys identified as root cause.
- Clock mechanics outsourcing (~£2.0m additional cost) required because Parliament's in-house specialist team lacked capacity for conservation work.
- Scaffolding costs grew £5m from OBC owing to unique requirements (largest free-standing scaffold in Europe) only apparent after detailed design.
- Covid costs added £7.8m to outturn. BDO audit concluded no material exceptions in final account; Broom Report identified poor contract structure (mixed pricing options, insufficient team training) but lessons now embedded in Parliamentary policy.
Tone
FactualTopics
capital-projectsheritage-conservationprocurementproject-management
Key actors
Finance Committee, Sir Robert McAlpine, Purcell Architecture, Curry and Brown, BDO, JCBA, Broom Report
Notable line
“… the fieldwork and further analysis conducted by the audit team did not identify any clear, obvious or material exceptions/errors which would necessitate withholding or delaying final account sign-off.”
Key Quotes
“… the fieldwork and further analysis conducted by the audit team did not identify any clear, obvious or material exceptions/errors which would necessitate withholding or delaying final account sign-off.”
“Mixing of Pricing options (A&B) and bespoke amendments were ill-advised, (2) Lack of training of project team on 'new' form of contract.”
“On stonework, over four times as much work as originally allowed for was needed: inadequate surveys and benchmarking could have avoided over optimism.”
Source · parliament.uk record ↗