Paper from Jeremy Thompson, Connecting
Communities project participant—Birmingham Edgbaston
1. HOW COULD
THE PALACE
OF WESTMINSTER
BE MADE
MORE VISITOR
FRIENDLY?
To an outsider, the assumption seems to be that
the majority of people would want to come as tourists rather than
to be a part of the democratic process.
I was surprised to hear that anyone can have
entry to Central Lobby to wait for an MP. That is not mentioned
outside nor could I find it on the Parliament website. The security
system makes you feel that you can only go into the building if
you have a paper from your MP or if you queue for Strangers Gallery.
Strangers' Gallery is an archaic term. `Public
gallery' or `Visitors' gallery' would be much better and more
welcoming.
The signage could be improved. Signage outside
the building would be extremely helpful. Even inside the building
"The House of Commons" and "The House of Lords"
were not well signposted.
The building feels awesome rather than welcoming.
Guides who offer information would be helpful. The Ushers seem
rather stuffy and focused on procedure. They hasten you to the
right place and don't seem to be very approachable.
Disability issues—lots of stairs, no signing
for deaf, didn't see any Braille
Security, whilst essential can seem off-putting,
but I would accept there is probably no way of changing that.
There was a sense on entering Committees that
you should not be there. People stared and looked annoyed at the
disturbance caused by people trying to get in and out.
2. HOW COULD
PROCEEDINGS IN
PARLIAMENT (COMMITTEE
MEETINGS, THE
CHAMBER, WESTMINSTER
HALL) BE
MADE EASIER
TO FOLLOW?
Select Committee
Everyone had a name card in front of them which
was a great help, but depending on where you were sitting you
couldn't see them all.
If the proceedings are being recorded, it would
be helpful if they were projected onto a screen for the public
to see, as all that you could see of those giving evidence was
the backs of their heads.
Chamber
It is very difficult to know `who's who' and
it would be helpful for visitors to know who is speaking. Two
suggestions—either at the start of a question, comment or
speech each MP states who they are; or screens are put up and
names are put on the screens.
MPs on all sides adopting a more constructive
approach to the issues rather than seeking to win points against
each other may increase the respect people may have for the work
in the Chamber!
There was a sense in which it seems rather theatrical
and stage-managed: Members of the opposition seemed to use their
subsidiary questions as an opportunity to merely attack the government.
There were times when government backbenchers offered subsidiaries
Which seemed to be a means to give the government credit and to
look good in the eyes of their own constituents. I did wonder
if they had been primed to ask their questions, or if the government
had been advised of their subsidiary questions. The danger is
that it all adds to the feeling that politics is more about spin
rather than substance and integrity.
There were times when MPs and Ministers used
abbreviations for organisations that I did not recognise.
Those in the gallery would be asked to leave
if they chatted during proceedings. However, there were a lot
of MPs having chats with each other during questions to the Health
Ministers. Whilst some of this may relate to the debate etc, it
looked like much was a mix of in-jokes and catching up on news!
The noise it causes is a distraction from the official proceedings.
Standing Committee
It was incomprehensible! But it did give an
insight into the detailed process at this stage. Again an indication
of "who's who" would have been incredibly helpful—using
the suggestions made for the Chamber.
This was the one venue where it was very difficult
to hear what was being said due to an inadequate PA system.
Westminster Debate
This seemed a much more constructive approach.
The visitor could more easily grasp the issues
under discussion.
Some indication of who's who would be helpful.
3. HOW EASY
IS IT
TO GET
INFORMATION FROM
THE WEBSITE,
TELEVISION, NEWSPAPERS
ETC? ARE
THERE ANY
KINDS OF
INFORMATION TO
WHICH YOU
WOULD LIKE
TO HAVE
ACCESS, WHICH
IS CURRENTLY
DIFFICULT TO
GET HOLD
OF?
I don't think Parliament does enough to actively
encourage involvement. Where does it advertise that people can
comment on Bills, how they can do that and when? There needs to
be a better way of explaining the systems to the average constituent.
I learnt that the public can submit written
evidence to select committees. How do select committees canvass
for such evidence from the general public? I had not heard of
the Modernisation Committee before nor that it was seeking input
from the public. When I found the Modernisation Committee's section
on the website, whilst I did find an invitation to submit ideas,
it would have been more helpful to have some information about
the specific areas that the Committee is currently investigating.
If people are to engage with issues and respond then Parliament
needs to be more proactive in promoting a desire to hear from
the public.
Also, through voluntary work I am involved in,
I am concerned about some provisions in the Asylum and Immigration
Bill. However, I could not find on the Parliament Website when
this was to be debated in the Commons or how I could make my comments
known.
My understanding, from being a participant in
this project, is that Parliamentary debates are scheduled only
a week or two in advance. If that is the case, then it is difficult
for a member of the public to gain access to hear a specific debate
they are interested in—as they may not be able to have time
off work at short notice, their MP may not be able to get tickets
for Strangers' gallery for that particular time; and if they queue
to get in they may not be successful. It is also very short notice
for people to contact MPs or peers with their views.
4. DOES PARLIAMENT
ADEQUATELY REFLECT
THE CONCERNS
OF ORDINARY
PEOPLE? DO
YOU FEEL
THAT IT
WOULD BE
EASY FOR
YOU TO
GET AN
ISSUE RAISED
IN PARLIAMENT
IF YOU
NEEDED TO?
Parliament is a distant concept for most people.
We do not expect to get involved. The only real time you expect
to have any influence is at a general election.
It seems that it is only through a massive organised
campaign that Parliament will begin to take notice, eg the Jubilee
Debt campaign which has been well-organised, carefully targeted,
large scale and sustained over many years.
My limited experience of writing to MPs or Ministers
(and I have lived in the constituencies of both Labour and Conservative
MPs) is that you generally get a response that reiterates their
party view. It reflects the adversarial nature of politics rather
than a desire to consider the points raised. I do not feel that
an individual constituent writing on an issue—particularly
a national or international issue—does anything to affect
a MPs decision-making. However, a large number of constituents
taking such action MAY have an impact, but I'm sceptical.
I was very surprised to hear through the Hansard
Society that MPs could be asked to present petitions to Parliament
but I couldn't find anything on the Parliament Website to explain
how to do this or to encourage this.
I was also surprised to hear from Joan Ruddock
MP, at the meeting on 26 January, that she was not permitted to
write to her constituents aged 18 on the issue of top up fees
to ascertain their opinions, except at her own expense. Whilst
one would not encourage mailings which were mere propaganda for
an MP, it seems ridiculous that an MP cannot write to solicit
opinion from the very people that they are supposed to represent!
How are MPs to represent their constituents if they cannot discover
their thoughts? I would encourage the Committee to look at this
issue and ways in which MPs can be encouraged to canvass opinion,
together with regulations that would prevent abuses of such a
system.
And finally, a comment has been made that democracy
in the UK today is under threat due to apathy. If this is the
case then it is Parliament who must address that issue and actively
seek stronger links with the community. Otherwise, politicians
will be seen as mere vote catchers at election time who do little
else to draw into the democratic process those who elected them.
| 
