The House of Lords has been slammed after they claimed that staffing a £9.6 million door full-time due to breakdowns had not cost the taxpayer a single extra penny. Peers were shocked when, after months the authority finally revealed that the new high-tech entrance to Parliament had cost a whopping £9.6 million, despite it frequently breaking down with Lords trapped inside.

As a result, the door has been manned around the clock for months, prompting Lord Hayward to demand answers about a potential higher cost of the farce. In a response to questioning, the Lords claimed that “the resources costs associated with the operation of Peers’ Entrance have been met from existing pools of staff and departmental budgets, with no additional cost to the House or to the taxpayer.” Adding that the average annual cost to parliament of a front-line security officer is around £46k, including salary, pension and national insurance.  In a further letter from the senior deputy speaker, it was bizarrely claimed: “It is normal within an operation the size of the Parliamentary Security Department to be able to temporarily reassign resources in this way without causing a wider negative impact.”

Ahead of a crunch meeting of the Lords Commission tomorrow, Lord Hayward has now slammed this proof of massive staffing waste by Parliament in a letter, pointing out: “It is fair to say that both taxpayers and private sector employers will view your letter of 7th July with both disbelief and despair. It confirms what many have always believed about the public sector.

“To explain inefficiencies away on the basis of ‘others do it’, I’m afraid, reflects extremely badly on management, at all levels, across this site.

“Despite what you say in your letter, it is not ‘normal within an operation of [this] size’ to retain staff who can be available to work in another role should the need arise for anything other than a very short period. This reflects a level of overmanning which would drive a private sector business to bankruptcy.”

Given the full-time cost of a Parliamentary security officer, the full-time manning of the broken door would have cost taxpayers around £100,000 on top of the £9.6 million cost.

The latest development once again raises questions of a cover up by the Lords establishment over the door scandal, as a letter from the Clerk of Parliaments to Lord Hayward defending the claim that full-time staffing of the door had not caused any additional costs demanded he do not pass it on to the media.

The top Lords bod wrote: “I trust this letter will remain confidential, and will not be shared by others.”

The eye-watering cost of the door forced out of Parliament by Baroness Smith following the election, blasting: “It is completely unacceptable that we have a door that does not operate as it should.”

Responding to Lord Hayward’s staffing revelations, William Yarwood, media campaign manager of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “Taxpayers have long known that there is vast amounts of waste on the parliamentary estate.

“Now the authorities have effectively admitted that they have busybodies roaming parliament with little to nothing to do.

“Parliament should review its staffing levels and consider where savings can be made.”

A House of Lords spokesperson said: “The safety and security of all users of the estate is a key priority for us, as is the need to deliver value for money for the taxpayer. There is no additional cost to the taxpayer from the current staffing arrangements at Peers’ Entrance.”