I usually try to avoid, when writing this column, the self-indulgence of talking about Parliament as an institution. However, the report published last week about the cost of refurbishment of the Palace of Westminster has taken up a lot of column inches in the media, not least because of the scale of the problem.
The Palace of Westminster was built to replace the old palace (burnt down in 1832) and was constructed as an office for those who scrutinise the the government. This function still performs today. So refurbishment, in its capacity purely as an office, at billions of pounds, the right thing to do would be to demolish it and start again.
But of course, the Palace of Westminster is not simply an office block: it is a grade 1 listed building, a UNESCO World Heritage site, and one of the most iconic symbols of Britain, known across the globe. To demolish it would be an act of untold cultural vandalism and the destruction of one of this country's biggest tourist attractions.
The cheapest estimate of refurbishment is £3.9 bln - the highest £5.7 bln. £5.7 bln buys a 32 year (minimum) rolling programme of refurbishment carried out alongside the ongoing business of the palace. The cheapest option requires clearing the building and having a 6 year intensive refurbishment programme.
My favoured option would be to simply get on with it. Having scaffolding over the building for more than three decades would hardly enhance its attraction, as well as costing significantly more. Moving out deals with the problem.
A proposal I find attractive is to move parliament to the regions for the duration of the refurbishment. Either relocate to, say, Birmingham for six years, or have it move around, spending just a year in each of six regions. Of course, there are serious logistical problems of having a touring parliament, not least the thousands of people who work in support of the legislative process who would need to relocate as well.
However, one of the most important features of parliament is that we can call government minsters to account with just a few hours' notice. Trying to operate from Birmingham, it would be nearly impossible to hold minsters to account in the same way, it being impossible to move all government departments to follow wherever parliament decides to relocate. This complex debate, though, will run and run.