THE wind whistles through my room in the parliamentary press gallery, because the ancient windows are like paper and – because they are listed – they can’t be changed.

In winter, it’s sometimes hard to type because it’s so cold – while, in summer, it can be so hot that only surrounding myself with fans makes it bearable.

Meanwhile, the mice can be quick to snaffle the remains of any food that reporters are unwise enough to eat their desks, although I haven’t seen any recently, to be fair.

I tell you this not to complain, because it is a tremendous privilege to work at the Houses of Parliament and the view of a sun-kissed Big Ben outside my window is breathtaking.

No, I tell you because it hopefully illustrates the downside of working in what must be Britain’s oldest office building – creating problems far, far more severe than mine.

In short, the Palace of Westminster is plagued by electrical problems, asbestos, other safety hazards and fire risks, which have the authorities here increasingly worried.

Surveyors found major subsidence, partly as a result of digging a new tube line underneath in the 1990s, and the Big Ben clock tower has developed an alarming 18-inch tilt.

MPs have missed votes after getting stuck in lifts and many of the 3,000 windows will not close properly, causing further damage to the fabric of a limestone building designed 170 years ago.

It costs £50m a year just to patch things up and, as director of restoration Richard Ware put it: “The more things become antiquated, the chances of a bigger crisis grow. It has already burned down once.”

I hope you are sitting comfortably before you read the cost of a full restoration of this Gothic masterpiece – a cool £4bn.

It being human nature, MPs and peers have put off a decision on this screaming headache, but they must make up their minds in 2016 – once the election is out of the way.

The issue is whether to try to work around the builders, or to move out completely – allowing the work to be completed faster.

Now, in last week’s column, I hailed the cross-party consensus that means a weakening of Whitehall’s grip on power and spending across the country is now inevitable.

George Osborne struck a landmark devolution deal with the ten Greater Manchester authorities that will be a marker for England’s other urban areas, including Tyneside and Teesside.

And the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats are locked in a battle to be the “party of devolution”, which they clearly now view as a vote-winner.

What bolder symbol could there be of this new beginning for the English regions than to move Parliament out of London, forcing MPs to taste life outside the capital for a change?

Why plump for bumping into builders when the alternative is to create a new Commons away from London’s wealth and arrogance – taking advantage of the essential refit?

MPs and peers should be combing the land to put together a shortlist of alternative buildings. Perhaps you can suggest a few in this region?

But you need to move fast. Just as Manchester snapped up the first big devolution deal, so it has already set up a taskforce to grab the prize of Parliament itself!