Visitor Tours (Hansard, 23 May 2002)

§ Mr. Kirkwood

Hon. Members were informed on 19 March of the Commission's wish to improve the arrangements to provide high quality tours for constituents and other visitors to the Palace, and its view that there should be a single official tours organisation supporting both the permanent Summer Opening and tours at other times. The Commission felt that this was an important part of its strategic aim to increase public understanding and knowledge of the House and its work.

At its meeting on 20 May the Commission considered the advice of the Administration Committee and the Board of Management on the way forward. We also took into account the views of a number of right hon. and hon. Members, their staff and staff of the House who have helpfully contributed to the process.

The House of Lords has an equal interest in visitor tours. We have sought the views of the authorities of that House on the improvements we would like to see, and will be working closely with them on the details.

515W

We think it is important that Members should have the same freedom and flexibility to arrange tours for their constituents as is now the case, but we believe that there is scope for improvement. We decided that: for the convenience of Members and their staff, the tours office should be a "one-stop shop", making bookings, issuing permits and allocating guides, and that funds should be provided for this in the current financial year. We thought that the separate, well-understood system for allocating Gallery tickets should remain unchanged, and that the separately organised Summer Opening primarily for tourists should not be affected; informal visits of six people or fewer accompanied by Members, Peers, or Officers of either House, or four people accompanied by other permanent passholders, should continue as at present. The ability of Members, their staff, and staff of the House to guide their own larger parties should they wish would be unaffected; in the interests of fairness, unguided and unaccompanied visits should be discontinued; guides should be drawn primarily from staff of the House, who have given excellent service over a number of years; and that staff from all House Departments should be given the opportunity to contribute. We supported the idea of a guiding qualification that would help maintain high standards and encourage House staff to take part; tours should emphasise the role and work of the House just as much as the history and the heritage of the building.

We thought that the new arrangements should begin to operate from the beginning of the next Session of Parliament, although some aspects (for example the guiding qualification) will need to be phased in over a longer period of time. We were also conscious of the restrictions that possible changes in sitting times of this House might impose on access. In order not to reduce the total number of visitors who are able to come to the House, Saturday opening may be an option.

We had well in mind the need to ensure that the costs to visitors are kept as low as possible, especially in the interests of groups such as school parties and old age pensioners. We have asked the Finance and Services Committee to look at possible cost structures and to report to us for our next meeting. We have also asked the Board of Management now to develop a detailed implementation plan.

The views of Members, their staff and staff of the House will be a welcome contribution to the development of the new arrangements. They should be sent to the Serjeant at Arms as the member of the Board of Management responsible for this project.