Democracy and the Tower

I recently spoke in a Commons debate on whether we should charge the public for access to the Clock Tower that houses Big Ben — £15 to climb it, gawp at the cell where a recalcitrant MP can still be locked up and examine the workings of the world's most famous timepiece.

Some spoke to state that it costs money to guide people around this building and times are tough so it is right that charges are made.

My view was different — that this was about democracy itself. I argued that whilst budget savings should be made we should ensure that our parliament is accessible to the public, irrespective of ability to pay.

Some, of course, argued that the Clock Tower is not an area of Parliament involved in the transaction of democracy — unlike, for example, the Chamber or the Committee Rooms, and that therefore free access should not matter.

My argument was that a physical separation from these particular areas is immaterial — the Clock Tower is iconic; it represents Parliament as the most recognisable structure this country possesses.

It is physically separate from the Chamber but in the world's consciousness inseparable from the cradle of our democracy.

If you accept this view then surely it follows that we have a moral duty to provide free access to the Clock Tower in the same way that we have that duty to provide free access to see an MP or a debate.

Just before our deliberations concluded an announcement was made that the authorities would back down — there would be no charges.

This in itself made this a big debate, for it changed something – right there, Parliament spoke and was heard, all under the shadow of the great tower about which we were all so very vexed.