Should Parliament temporarily move out of London? Surely it's not that grim up North?

Further plans to relocate Parliament during a planned refurbishment of the Palace of Westminster have been revealed (click here for a new article from The Guardian). However, it would appear that the option to move MPs and Peers to chambers outside of London has now been abandoned. This decision is based upon a need to have Ministers accountable to Parliament and well, the Ministers are not moving so Parliament needs to say somewhere within calling distance.

Now I live near Crewe, in the North West of England, but often take the 140 mile journey to visit London when delivering events in our great capital. I can comfortably get to the centre of London by 8.30am if I need to. To me it seems a little short-sighted that an opportunity to temporarily re-locate Parliament does not include an option to move out of London. At a time when engagement in politics seems to be on the wain, turnouts at elections are falling and the UK appears to be splitting into 4 as the Provinces see themselves as being ruled by a political elite in London that, for the sake of a bit of a trip out of the Big Smoke, we can't have a temporary Parliament somewhere else. Is this opportunity to re-engage with the great British public being rejected? Might the decision further promote the view among the regions that Parliament is made up of an out-of-touch bunch of career politicians?