Sir Alan Campbell

I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman will make his points about the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829, and the discrimination against Jews under the provisions from the 1860s, which banned them from doing certain things, in the debate, if he is able to. The difference is that we have a Catholic Prime Minister, so it is key that nothing gets in the way of him taking part in any deliberations. I am sure that the House is keen to make these changes to outdated legislation. There is a report suggesting a way forward on restoration and renewal. I have committed to bringing forward a motion on the subject, because I absolutely agree with the right hon. Gentleman: it is time that we got on with this work. There is not full agreement across the House about what that means, but it is important that we get a debate. He should not believe everything that he is told, or reads, about any postponement. The purpose is not to postpone restoration and renewal; the reality is that it has been postponed for far too long. The longer we postpone it, the more it costs not just to keep this place functioning, but to eventually get round to doing something about it. However, I admit that my approach has not been to rush into this work, or to get the House to rush into it, because I want consensus, if we can get it. That is the best way of going forward. There is not a consensus, but we can work toward one. I want to build in as many safeguards as possible. For example, I would like to see the outcome of the inquiry by the Public Accounts Committee. Quite rightly, MPs will ask, “How do you ensure that this work will provide value for money, if you decide to do it?”. On timing, all I would say is that we need to get on with this work, so watch this space.