Boris Johnson’s suggestion of moving parliament to York while a multibillion-pound restoration of the Palace of Westminster takes place will not be considered by a body reviewing the plans. The prime minister had requested that a “possible location outside London” be looked at as a place for parliament to sit while the crumbling palace is revamped at an estimated cost of £4bn. However, the sponsor body and delivery authority that are working jointly on the restoration and renewal plans made clear that it was for MPs and peers to decide where they should sit and the York proposal would not form part of the review. Johnson raised the possibility last month in a letter to the sponsor body’s chief, Sarah Johnson, and the delivery authority’s chief, David Goldstone, writing: “The government is considering establishing a government hub in York and it would therefore make sense to consider this as a potential location.” He also noted that the review, which is being conducted by the sponsor body, “should advise on the best model of delivery”, including considering the case for both houses to remain in situ while works are carried out, or a decant of one or both houses. Johnson also noted possible locations in London including the Whitehall building Richmond House, the QEII Centre and City Hall. In a joint letter in reply, the two chief executives wrote: “As you have already noted, the option of locating parliament outside London has constitutional implications, which makes this a matter for both Houses to determine rather than for our review. “While the sponsor body and delivery authority are now independent bodies, we are mindful of the importance of conducting our work within the parameters set down by both Houses of Parliament including the legislation passed in 2019, and the preferred locations for the temporary chambers which have been determined by the House commissions.” In 2018, MPs and peers agreed to a plan that would see both houses move to temporary facilities near the existing site as part of a “full decant” to allow essential repairs to the Palace of Westminster. But a review of the plans is being carried out by the restoration and renewal sponsor body amid concerns over the cost. A spokesman for the restoration and renewal programme said: “The option of locating parliament outside London has constitutional implications, and as the speakers of both Houses have stated, this means it is a matter for both houses to determine rather than for our review. “In line with best practice, we remain committed to developing a business case that will set out in detail the options for restoring parliament, including cost estimates and timescales.”