好色先生TV

As the seat of Scotland鈥檚 democratically elected legislature, the parliament is the country鈥檚 most public building. It was completed five years ago to a competition-winning design by the late Enric Miralles, and it went on to win the UK鈥檚 top architectural award, the Stirling prize, in 2005. As such it should be popular. And indeed it is 鈥� wildly so. It consistently attracts 400,000 visitors a year, making it Scotland鈥檚 most looked-at building after Edinburgh castle.

But ask how this home of democracy actually operates, and you get a more sullen response, at least initially. 好色先生TV sent a number of letters to the parliamentary authorities to request permission to write a Revisit feature, which is essentially a road test of a project we covered just after it was completed. All were rejected. You don鈥檛 have to be paranoid to wonder whether this uncooperative attitude betrays a lingering defensiveness dating from the scandal over the cost of the project, which rose from 拢40m to 拢414m; that works out at 拢12,558/m2 in 2005 prices . Added to that, a series of defects have made themselves known after the building was finished, in the form of slipping beams, leaking roofs and an infestation of pigeons.

Undeterred, 好色先生TV applied directly to the MSPs themselves. Three backbenchers from three parties responded positively. The first was the veteran politician Margo MacDonald, who is presently the parliament鈥檚 only independent, and an unflagging critic of the building. The second was Robin Harper, who is one of Scotland鈥檚 two Green party MSPs, and the convenor of two cross-party parliamentary groups, one on architecture and the built environment and the other on renewable energy and energy efficiency. Our third guide was Labour MSP Des McNulty; he had a leading role in setting up Glasgow鈥檚 International Festival of Architecture and Design in 1999.

The first question to ask was how the exterior of the building strikes all those sightseers and passers-by. 鈥淧eople don鈥檛 like it very much outside, because it doesn鈥檛 harmonise with what鈥檚 around it,鈥� says MacDonald. 鈥淎nd I don鈥檛 know where the centre is.鈥�

McNulty points out that, ironically, the building鈥檚 entrance for visitors is its 鈥渓east welcoming part鈥�. It is preceded by a deep canopy in grey concrete with a hefty concrete beam above it that bears weathering streaks and surface cracks. 鈥淚t鈥檚 dark and gloomy, particularly in our climate, and it feels like a cave,鈥� he adds.

鈥淭he view from Salisbury Crags shows the building off in the way that Miralles intended,鈥� says a more equivocal Harper. But how many of the 400,000 visitors a year will climb to the top of the wild volcanic peak to admire this view? They are more likely to approach the building by coach, from where they will be greeted by a baffling jumble of gaunt forms and dark materials such as Aberdeen granite, fairface concrete and a loose scattering of 鈥渂amboo poles鈥� (really varnished oak). If there is a key motif here, it is the repetitive concrete wall panels in the inexplicable shape of a sawn-off revolver.

If any building really does need to have an iconic form, it is a national legislature. Other than the aerial panorama, the most memorable view of the Scottish parliament building is of the highly sculptural 鈥渢hink pods鈥� that project from the MSPs鈥� block, but this is tucked down a narrow side alley. As for a landmark skyline to rival Big Ben or the many towers and domes around Edinburgh, this just doesn鈥檛 exist. Harper acknowledges this omission: 鈥淵ou don鈥檛 walk past this building saying, 鈥楾hat鈥檚 a big impressive building, that鈥檚 a parliament.鈥� You walk past saying, 鈥榃hy?鈥欌��.

As for the building鈥檚 interior, ubiquitously fitted out in natural oak, our three MSPs were unanimous about its positive impact. 鈥淔or most people who鈥檝e been taken round, their immediate reaction is just to be stunned by the interior,鈥� says Harper. 鈥淚t does provide a certain inspiration. Architects in particular like the finish, and the general visitor likes the feel of it. Children love it; I think that says Miralles really did get it right.鈥�

The central space is the garden lobby, which is furnished with tables and chairs and is covered by the 鈥渦pturned boats鈥� of elongated curved skylights in glass and polished steel. To McNulty, this lobby is the fulcrum of Scottish politics. 鈥淚t鈥檚 a meeting place like a village centre, and if you sit here on a Thursday just before the first minister鈥檚 questions, just about everybody who鈥檚 anybody in Scotland goes past.鈥�

Harper concurs: 鈥淵ou can鈥檛 sit here for half an hour without picking up on the huge buzz of this building. And there is everything we need all around 鈥� our food, our information centre, the doctor, the presiding officer鈥檚 office and our garden.鈥�

As for the four committee rooms that have grandstand views of Salisbury Crags, even MacDonald finds these irresistible.

鈥淥n a summer鈥檚 day, it鈥檚 wonderful to sit in them. You think you鈥檙e sitting in the clouds.鈥�

Harper thinks the committee tables, which are egg-shaped with hollow cores, provide good sight lines for delegates. But MacDonald points out that they are so inflexible that removing them temporarily for an exhibition or reception costs 拢1,000.

The fan-shaped debating chamber, with its flurry of oak roof beams and ample daylight, always gives McNulty a buzz as he enters. He also finds the sight lines good, and appreciates the sound amplification and audiovisual screens built into each desk. But for MacDonald, the orientation of the MSPs鈥� desks towards the presiding officer does pose a problem. 鈥淓ach MSP has a desk microphone, but it鈥檚 not omnidirectional,鈥� she says. 鈥淥ur style of democracy and debate is to look each other in the eye. It鈥檚 not to listen to a lecture, as is common on the Continent. If an MSP in front addresses the presiding officer, it鈥檚 his eloquent back we see. If he turns round, he goes off-mic. The mics should really be above our heads.鈥�

Each MSP is assigned his or her narrow office with its own projecting window bay. Harper appreciates the space it provides for three employees, as well as the MSP, but McNulty criticises the lack of acoustic screens between the outer two desks and the corridor. And MacDonald adds: 鈥淎sk MSPs, and they鈥檒l tell you they鈥檙e very confining and very constrained. And everyone will tell you the lighting is poor.鈥�

The peculiar form of the projecting bay window was actually designed as a 鈥渢hink pod鈥�. But they don鈥檛 impress MacDonald, who says: 鈥淭hey have had sticky-backed plastic put around them, because you bang your head when you try to sit down.鈥� Harper was one MSP who overcame his initial scepticism and learned how to use his pod for the purpose intended. 鈥淨uite often, when I want to compose a complicated response to somebody, I will sit in the pod, as it鈥檚 easier to think there. There鈥檚 a little skylight above your head, and you can look up and see the clouds scurrying past.鈥�

Though designed and built in a single 33,000m2 phase on a confined site, the building is not, as McNulty points out, a single unit but a combination of structures. For him, the whole complex comes together as an integrated campus that instils 鈥渁 shared purpose and great loyalty to parliament鈥� in all the MSPs and staff. All three MSPs also appreciate the convivial interaction between MSPs, staff and even visitors that is engendered by the compact layout.

The downside of the compact layout is that it is inflexible, yet alterations, and very likely extensions, will be inevitable over the building鈥檚 100-year design life. For example, male visitors are supplied with a single toilet cubicle that contains two urinals (MacDonald claims she pointed out this inadequacy at design stage). In addition Miralles curved forms and the structure鈥檚 award-winning status will make substantial changes difficult. This does not apply, however, to alterations that increase security. Just last year, ferocious-looking security turnstiles were inserted into the ceremonial entrance off the Royal Mile. And a ring of security bollards with deep foundations are now being installed outside the complex at a cost of 拢1.5m.

The contorted, multi-level layout also poses problems of accessibility. So how does MacDonald, who has walking difficulties, cope? 鈥淕od knows. I鈥檝e got wee hidey holes that I work out in advance. It鈥檚 not very good.鈥�

Well, can鈥檛 all the design faults that she鈥檚 pointed out be put right? 鈥淥h no, no dear, this place is a thing of beauty,鈥� she replies, possibly with her tongue in her cheek. 鈥淵ou can never get rid of these projecting windows on the MSPs鈥� block, because they鈥檙e now on the tea towels.鈥�

Harper and McNulty find the building 鈥渁bsolutely wonderful鈥� and 鈥渧ery worthy of the Stirling prize鈥�. But perhaps the last word should go to the indefatigable MacDonald. 鈥淢y criticisms might seem churlish when the place cost almost half a billion pounds, but it鈥檚 the frustration of seeing things that should, we thought anyway, have been basic to good design. If the whole design process were better managed, we might have avoided things like that.鈥�