Memoranda submitted by the House of Commons
Administration
Memorandum from the Board of Management
Review of Post-Election Services for new Members (October 2005)
INTRODUCTION AND
METHODOLOGY
1. The views of Members and the House administration
have been gathered on the services provided for new Members after
the May 2005 general election. All 123 new Members were sent a
brief questionnaire which allowed them to rate the service they
received and submit comments. 74 were returned, giving a response
rate of 60%. These questionnaires were followed up with structured
interviews. The comments attributed to Members in this report
draw on written comments from the questionnaires and points raised
during the interviews.
2. The House authorities separately examined
how well the arrangements worked from their own perspective. Departments
of the House analysed the lessons they thought they should learn
from the experience.
3. This report:
— presents the findings of the survey
of new Members; and
— reconciles Members' concerns with
the analysis already undertaken by the House administration.
Note: 58 new Members indicated a willingness
to be interviewed, but the staff conducting the interviews received
few responses to their requests to a representative sample of
Members, even when these were followed-up. Only four in-depth
interviews were therefore conducted, although every Member interviewed
raised very similar points and these were consistent with the
comments in the questionnaires. The detailed comments in the questionnaire
responses actually removed the need for a large number of detailed
interviews.
OVERALL
4. 84% of new Members surveyed were satisfied
with the reception facilities and services.
We asked new Members to respond to the statement,
"Overall, I was satisfied with the reception facilities and
services; all my immediate needs were addressed." 42% of
respondents agreed strongly; 42% tended to agree; 8% tended to
disagree; 4% disagreed strongly and 4% did not express a view.
5. New Members appreciated the friendliness,
helpfulness and professionalism of House staff.
Over 10 new Members commented specifically
on the quality of the welcome they received from staff. One wrote:
"House of Commons staff were unfailingly courteous, knowledgeable
& helpful!"
6. Delays in providing IT equipment and
allocating office space caused new Members most dissatisfaction.
Although new Members appreciated the hot-desking
facility (though with reservations—see below), more than
a dozen Members complained that the time taken to allocate offices
was too long, slightly fewer complained that the provision of
IT equipment had not met their expectations or business need.
LETTER FROM
THE CLERK
OF THE
HOUSE
7. New Members were overwhelmingly satisfied
with the letter from the Clerk of the House which was delivered
to them by the returning officer. They thought it could be improved
by including a map showing entrances to the Parliamentary estate,
making clear any dates fixed by Whips for new Members' first attendance,
and providing Whips' contact details.
95% of survey respondents agreed strongly
or tended to agree with the statement, "The letter from the
Clerk of the House, delivered by the returning officer, was welcoming
and helpful." The letter included information about when
and how new Members could attend Parliament for the first time.
It also advertised a password-protected website which new Members
could use to obtain further information, including hotel details.
Unfortunately, the website address was misprinted on the letter.
The House authorities took steps to notify new Members of the
correct address, but this error still caused some new Members
problems. In follow-up interviews, new Members suggested that
the inclusion of a map showing the buildings and entrances to
the Parliamentary estate would help those unfamiliar with Westminster
find, for example, St Stephen's Entrance. They also thought there
might be scope for better co-ordination with the Whips so that
the letter included not only the times and dates of opening of
the reception area, but also any times and dates on which various
Whips wished their new Members to gather, as well as office contact
numbers for the Whips' offices.
MEMBER'S
HANDBOOK AND
OTHER INFORMATION
FOR NEW
MEMBERS
8. The introductory pack of booklets provided
the right level of information for new Members and answered most
of their questions. New Members sometimes felt over-loaded with
information. They found information better when it was consolidated
across House Departments, and when duplication was avoided. New
Members welcome check-lists which help them ensure that they have
done the right things by the correct deadlines. Members who attended
briefing sessions found them useful, but there was no significant
consensus on when they might be held to maximise relevance and
attendance.
88% of survey respondents agreed strongly
or tended to agree with the statement, "The introductory
pack of booklets provided the right amount of information and
answered most of my questions. 5% tended to disagree; 3% disagreed
strongly; and 4% had no opinion or did not respond. Several respondents
commented that they had received too much information at the start,
and that this should be staggered over a longer period. Those
Members interviewed welcomed the Q&A format of the Members'
Handbook, and believed that hard copy was the best format for
introductory information. As one Member pointed out: "You
don't know what you don't know."
One interviewee suggested a check-list of
things a new Member should have received and know by the end of
the first week, and a longer-term check-list supplemented by chasing
from the administration for crucial forms. One Member was alarmed
to find that she only met by chance the deadline for ensuring
her staff were paid in their first month; she felt this was an
important deadline for Members who had just engaged new staff,
and that they should be reminded of it by the House administration.
Another suggestion was that all the forms which a new Member should
complete and return should be consolidated into a single, clearly-labelled
pack; otherwise, they were received from different sources and
got lost with other non-essential papers. The Department of Finance
and Administration is due to report shortly to the Advisory Panel
on Members' Allowances on a review of the services it provides
to Members at the election, including information on allowances.
We asked the Members we interviewed about
their experience of the briefing sessions organised for new Members
by various House departments. Those who had attended them found
them useful, although they recognised that there was a balance
to be struck between holding them at an early enough stage for
them to be useful and a late enough stage for Members to be available.
Two Members suggested that the time around the "second week"
(ie after swearing-in but either side of the State Opening) had
been less busy for them and was the most convenient time.
NEW MEMBERS'
RECEPTION AREA
9. New Members were very satisfied with
the help available at the reception area. Some believed that they
received so much information at the reception area that it would
be better to prioritise it more clearly, or repeat the event later,
perhaps in July. Members attach considerable importance to being
able to function as Members from day one, and they thought the
reception area should focus on achieving that.
81% of Members surveyed agreed strongly and
14% tended to agree with the statement "The reception area
was easy to find and I was able to talk to staff who could help
me." Members' comments suggested that they found it useful
to have information available in one place, even if they did feel
slightly over-loaded on their first day. Some suggested repeating
the event at a later stage, or keeping the stalls available for
a longer period.
In response to the concern about information
overload, we asked in our interviews with new Members what they
wanted to know in the first day, in the first week, in the first
month and at a later stage. There was general agreement among
interviewees that they wanted to get up and running on the first
day. This was supported by other new Members' written comments
about the availability of IT equipment and offices (see below),
and meant that they thought that the reception area for day one
should focus on practicalities: pass issuing; immediate distribution
of IT equipment and very basic training; issuing of phone numbers
and voicemail instructions (formal voicemail training was considered
excessive); instructions about how to collect post (at least one
Member reported not being told about the arrangement, and ended
up with a back-log as a result); and the issuing of a single sheet
detailing the programme of introductory events in the following
days and weeks.
One improvement suggested by the Members we
interviewed was the distribution of maps of the estate and a brief
tour of the Palace on their first day. They needed to learn quickly
how to find their way around the principal floor in particular.
This could be combined with practical advice, for example about
quick routes to the Chamber, and the location of restaurants.
(One Member reported in July that she had only just—and
by accident—discovered the Tea Room and the Members' Dining
Room.)
HOT-DESKING,
OFFICE ACCOMMODATION
AND OFFICE
SERVICES
10. Over half of the new Members who responded
reported using the hot-desking facilities, and a significant proportion
said they found them useful. However, more Members commented on
shortcomings of the hot-desking arrangements than praised their
usefulness. Members felt some users were hogging computers, and
that there were not enough computers or printers. Some Members
thought the concept of hot-desking was inappropriate for their
work because it did not afford them any privacy or because they
could not have files close to hand as they worked. Members also
thought that there needed to be more telephones at hot-desks.
Some Members made clear that the provision of hot-desks did not
remove the need for a quiet, private space, for example for work
or for media interviews.
35% of survey respondents agreed strongly
with the statement "I made use of the hot-desking facilities
provided". 20% tended to agree. 23% disagreed strongly. Taken
together with the written comments, this suggests that a significant
number of new Members found the arrangements unsatisfactory. New
Members reported that the hot-desks were often full. When we discussed
this further at interview, we were told that some Members (and
indeed researchers) hogged hot-desk PCs and would log-in for the
whole day, leaving papers around the PC during periods of absence.
This prevented other users from logging in. Some Members used
PCs in the Library instead, and the House authorities recognise
that additional hot-desks could be sited in other rooms after
the next election.
Some Members commented that there was not
enough printing capacity at the hot-desks. They reported queues
of people waiting to log on to those PCs which had printers attached
(which were themselves often hogged by forthright users). Several
new Members also commented that the access to telephones in the
hot-desk area was too limited, and that there needed to be more.
A significant number of new Members suggested
either that hot-desking was inappropriate or inadequate for their
needs or that they would have been better served by the allocation
of temporary offices. One Member commented: "GIVE US TEMPORARY
OFFICES!!!! Having to use hot desks, clear our desks at night
& unable to set up filing at the very moment we're besieged
with correspondence, briefings emails, etc is hopeless. Even if
they are just till the summer recess." Other Members pointed
to the need for confidentiality when dealing with constituents,
and the need for privacy and quiet when conducting media interviews.
One Member suggested partitioning Committee rooms and allocating
them as temporary offices for Members.
11. A significant number of respondents
felt it had taken too long to provide them with permanent offices.
They generally recognised that office allocation was the responsibility
of the Whips. Some Members considered that this delay, together
with delays in the supply of IT equipment, had severely constrained
their ability to serve their constituents. Several new Members
"squatted" with returning Members who already had access
to an office.
As reported above there were complaints that
it took too long to allocate offices. Some Members' comments suggested
that they could understand the need to wait one week, or perhaps
two, but that four was too long. The following comments were typical:
"The situation on late room and IT allocation
have seriously marred my ability to
service constituents."
"It is 8 June and I am still not yet in an
office of my own—this really does need to change."
"There is no substitute for a proper office
and it is really hard to believe that the Whips can't sort it
out more quickly between them!"
Some Members sought out opportunities to share
the offices of Members who already had offices, although this
was not ideal. One Member commented that everything takes longer
without an office.
12. A significant number of respondents
felt that the arrangements for the supply of IT equipment did
not meet their business needs. They thought that it took too long
to deliver laptops in particular, and that communication with
new Members about supply delays was inadequate. The House authorities
acknowledge that the staff involved in taking orders from Members
need to be aware of delivery times and make them clear. Some new
Members suggested that a stockpile of used equipment should be
ready for temporary issue after the election to reduce any inconvenience
caused by delivery delays.
As reported above, around a dozen respondents
complained that the provision of IT equipment had not met their
expectations or business need. Of these, one of the most common
complaints was the delay in supplying laptops. Some new Members
also felt that they had not been updated on progress with their
IT orders. One said, "Follow-up by PCD was poor: after initial
briefings where we ordered our PC hardware we still have not been
informed of progress on our orders." Another suggested that
the IT helpdesk needed to be "more responsive". One
Member suggested that equipment should be surrendered by retiring
Members at the time of the election and re-issued, perhaps temporarily,
to new Members to attenuate the inconvenience caused by delays
in the delivery of new equipment, which may be beyond the control
of the House authorities.
CONCLUSIONS AND
LESSONS LEARNED
13. New Members appreciate the well-organised
way that both the House authorities and Whips provide them with
information. The immediate allocation of fully equipped offices
is the change which would most improve their working arrangements.
The House authorities and Accommodation Whips should continue
to work towards this aim, while recognising that it is not achievable
given the constraints which exist in the type, location and amount
of the accommodation available.
14. The House authorities recognise that
it took too long to move new Members into their offices after
the 2005 election. In part, this happened because an attempt was
made, in conjunction with the Accommodation Whips to re-organise
offices into party blocks at the election, as well as to provide
a balance of accommodation across the parties. This involved additional
office removals, including some returned Members. Any future re-balancing
will seek to avoid these additional moves. Prior to the next election,
a target for moving new Members into fully functioning offices
will be agreed with the Accommodation Whips and planning and resourcing
will be undertaken to achieve this.
15. Hot-desking arrangements, even if improved,
will never meet fully new Members' desire for privacy, peace and
permanency. Nevertheless, the House authorities will seek to ensure
that future hot-desking is improved. Possible methods might include:
— increasing the number of PCs, advertising
those available in the Library and investigating other rooms in
the Palace for temporary desking;
— increasing the number of printers;
— ensuring that the existing arrangement
where some PCs are for Members only are policed effectively;
— automatically logging-out users from
hot-desk PCs which remain inactive for a certain period (to prevent
hogging of hot-desks);
— providing more telephones on hot
desks;
— providing rooms which new Members
can use for media interviews; and
— providing lockable file storage for
each new Member near the hot-desk facilities.
16. In 2005, some new Members "squatted"
in returning Members' offices until their offices were ready.
The House authorities should investigate supporting this arrangement
better, particularly in respect of IT and telephone services.
If this arrangement were to be formalised, the assistance of the
Accommodation Whips would be necessary for its smooth operation.
17. The House authorities accept that new
Members need to know accurately when their personalised IT equipment
will be delivered and that this was not achieved in 2005. Planning
for future elections will address this issue.
18. The New Members' Reception Area was
a very successful element of the recent reception arrangements.
A similar facility should be provided for future elections. Lessons
learned are that the House authorities and Whips should liaise
closely about the content and timing. New Members' immediate concerns
were practical; pass, PC, 'phone, post and pay-roll. This should
form the basis for the reception area. Each Member should be given
a checklist of things to do within the first day, week and month.
This should include important deadlines (eg for the return of
forms to ensure staff are paid in the first month). The House
authorities should provide all forms which Members must complete
in a single pack, with the deadlines repeated. The House authorities
recognise that new Members' time is at a premium, and should consider
in light of new Members' comments whether some essential information
would be better provided in writing (eg basic IT and voicemail
instructions).
19. New Members prefer to receive information
in writing, but it needs to be consolidated across House Departments.
The House authorities should therefore consider reducing the scope
of Departments represented at the Reception Area, but expanding
the Member's Handbook so it includes supplementary information.
Alternatively, an information fair could be organised for the
following week to separate the administrative arrangements from
information about the functioning of the House.
20. There is little duplication in or conflict
between the information for new Members provided by the House
authorities and that provided by Whips, but the 2005 experience
suggests there may be some gaps, notably in helping new Members
navigate the Palace. The House authorities should consider how
they could assist new Members to orientate themselves in the period
immediately after they join. Options might include offering every
new Member a brief, business-oriented tour of the principal floor
on their first day, providing a check list of locations and directions
or providing a guide service for a short period for those Members
who required it.
21. Members appreciate the Clerk of the
House's letter to newly elected Members which is handed over by
every returning officer. It provides information about arriving
at Westminster, and in the future should include a map of entrances
to the estate. There is still scope for better co-ordination with
the Whips: they might welcome an opportunity to announce via the
Clerk's letter to each Members a date for each Party's new Members
to assemble at Westminster, for example. Shortly before the election,
the House authorities need to remind returning officers to hand
over the Clerk's letter to the newly elected Member.
|
