Examination of Witnesses (Questions 60-79)
MR ANDY
MARTIN, MS
JACQUI BANERJEE,
MS STEPHANIE
CARNACHAN AND
DR ELIZABETH
HALLAM SMITH
13 JUNE 2006
Q60 Mr Doran: My schools in Aberdeen
tend to come for the week and Parliament is on the agenda. Did
you have any discussions with schools who operated in the same
way? Did you get an impression of what else attracts them to London?
Ms Carnachan: I think for the
schools that are coming from further afield, London is always
going to be an attractive destination because if they do have
to come for a couple of days there are loads of things that they
can do while they are here. From the qualitative interviews, the
most mentioned things that came up were the Natural History Museum
and the Science Museum, but there was lots of mention of arts-related
things, going to the Royal Opera House, the Tate or Tate Modern,
that kind of thing as well. They appeared to have quite tightly
packed itineraries if they do come down here.
Mr Jones: Can I apologise for my late
attendance, I was speaking in the Chamber. How accurate is this
figure of 1.3 million? Did we just pluck it out of thin air? If
you look at last year, for example, and what it cost to put that
monstrosity on Palace Green, I think it finished up costing some
£300,000.
Chairman: Is this the ticket office?
Q61 Mr Jones: The ticket office,
and we over-estimated the number of visitors. So I am a bit sceptical
about this. Can I also ask a question about repeat visitors because
from my knowledge of the work of the North East Museum Service,
they work into their calculations a certain number of repeat visitors.
I wonder if that is reflected in this. I know from speaking to
them the only way that they get repeat visitors is if they put
new attractions on, and that involves a cost. So have we thought
about if we are going to be getting repeat visitors the cost of
re-doing or refreshing the experience every other year?
Mr Martin: In answer to the questions,
no we have not built repeat visiting into the calculations at
this point in time. We were simply asking: "Here is a potential
visitor centre, this is what will be in it, how likely are you
to go?" We have taken a simple calculation based on that.
Q62 Mr Jones: I am surprised at that
because if you talk to any museum service or any attraction, they
work on the basis of a certain percentage of repeat visitors.
Mr Martin: For on-going purposes
then, yes, we need to think about that and, yes, you are absolutely
correct that people do need to take into account a certain amount
of refreshment over time to make sure people do come back. At
this point in time we have so little information we can give to
people about what is going to be inside. The 1.3 million, as I
said before, is based on a snapshot, based on the sorts of things
that came through in the qualitative research that people said
they would be interested in and assumes that all of the things
would be there in the visitor centre. There is an awful lot of
information there about a lot of things that might be in the visitor
centre and that was the information people based their decisions
on. If you want a more accurate figure as you get further down
the road of deciding exactly what is going to be in the visitor
centre, you need to go back and ask people again rather than saying
here and now you will get 1.3 million visitors to your visitor
centre every year.
Q63 Mr Jones: What has been the purpose
of employing you to do this?
Mr Martin: We were employed to
find out what people would like to go in there and if that was
in there how many people would visit, so that is what we have
done. Until you have a better idea about exactly what is going
to be in that visitor centre, then we cannot give a more accurate
figure.
Baroness Prosser: Maybe we need to consider
more accurately what question we really want to ask. It is no
good thinking about it later really.
Q64 Mr Robathan: Mr Martin, I do
not blame you for the questions you have been asking. You said
that the majority of people are "very satisfied" were
your exact words and in the Executive Summary, which is always
the thing that one reads first it says that nine in 10 current
visitors are satisfied. Did you feel with the questions that you
were asked to ask that if nine out of 10 people are already satisfied
there was any burning need for a visitor centre?
Mr Martin: As we understood it,
the purpose of building the visitor centre was to broaden engagement
and encourage more people to become involved. As it stands, you
have a certain type of audience that comes to the Palace of Westminster,
either on the tours or who go into debates or meet their MPs or
Peers. Those are the people whom we interviewed as current visitors
and 67% were very satisfied, 20 something per cent were fairly
satisfied, and very few people were saying they were dissatisfied
with their visit, but that does not take into account the fact
of broadening the agenda or attracting more people into the building
or attracting more people to engage with the political process.
Q65 Mr Robathan: I am glad you raised
that because this is really what I am trying to get at. Again,
I am not blaming you for asking the questions. You are trying
to engage people but it seems to me that we are trying to set
up an alternative tourist attraction with taxpayers' money. Is
that what we are trying to do? What did you feel in your research?
All the things you are talking about seem to me to be marvellous
if we had the same as we have at some cost or other.
Mr Martin: I do not know that
that necessarily came into it in the way people were thinking
about the potential visitor centre. Initially with some of the
groups we had quite a lot of difficulty explaining what a visitor
centre was in the first place before we got going, but the suggestions
that came out of the qualitative research were the result of "blue
skies" thinking of "if I wanted to go to Parliament
and find out all about what goes on, these are the sorts of things
I would want to find out more about." That is what followed
through to the quantitative research.
Q66 Mr Robathan: A large number of
people who come here are of course school children, and that is
understandable, mostly of course inevitably from the south east.
You get very few of my constituents from Leicester coming down
here because it is too far. When you say people would like to
have been informed beforehand, if we are trying to engage people
in politics and perhaps teach them something of the history, as
opposed to just coming to a tourist attraction, I would have thought
people might have found out a little bit themselves, particularly
in terms of teachers. I am rather shocked to hear that perhaps
teachers have not been finding out anything about Parliament before
they come.
Mr Martin: Our respondents were
not part of the education sector.
Chairman: That is a question towards
the ladies. They did the research from the educational side and
did come up with some quite interesting findings. You said amongst
other things that it is a tourist attraction anyway and you could
make the quality of the experience better, is what this is all
really about, and what you were saying is that teachers felt probably
you would not get a great increase in numbers but you would get
a better quality of experience for the children. Is that correct?
I am not putting words into your mouth, am I?
Q67 Mr Robathan: It sounds like it
to me!
Ms Carnachan: We did not go specifically
into the numbers and how many visits there would be and so on,
but certainly from the teachers' perspective they felt that if
there was some kind of dedicated visitor centre then that would
certainly enhance the experience. Again the teachers that we spoke
to that had already visited Parliament were extremely positive
about the experience, but they felt that if there was an actual
visitor centre they could really develop that and make that into
something that could be used by a lot more children and in a lot
more different ways than what is available at the moment.
Q68 Mr Robathan: Since we have moved
on to Continental Research I might just pick something else up.
Every MP or indeed somebody who has been an MP probably spends
as much time as I do walking myself round the schools in my constituency.
Again, it is not your fault, but I was quite surprised you had
to tell us that the services identified by teachers that they
would like to have more of were visits to schools and "meet
your MP" sessions. I do that most weeks and I suspect I speak
for most of my colleagues past and present. What I am saying is
this is what we do so I am not quite sure whether this should
be done here.
Ms Carnachan: That was certainly
part of the qualitative research we did. We did cover some of
the services offered by the Education Unit which would include
those things. That is the perception. We only spoke to 12 teachers
so it was not a huge sample of people. There were a couple who
had had visits from their MPs and who did have that kind of relationship
already in place, but there were others who did not and that is
possibly a matter of location or the specifics to that particular
MP or the relationship that the school has got with the MP.
Chairman: Would anybody like to ask on
content?
Q69 David Lepper: Not on content,
but did you get any sense from the teachers that you spoke to
about how long they saw a visit to the visitor centre lasting?
Was there a maximum time? Was there a shortest time that each
visit should last to make it worthwhile?
Ms Banerjee: Yes, we covered that
in the quantitative research and we had some time bands that we
gave to respondents, and they answered those. What was most common
was a three to four hour slot or half a day with 52% wanting that.
Then there were 31% who would want two hours. There was no real
difference between primary and secondary schools so, as the previous
people who sat here said, it tends to be something where you can
arrive at 10 and leave at two and be back in time for the school
bus home.
Q70 Janet Anderson: I do not know
whether I am unusual but my constituency is in Lancashire and
I have people down from the constituency almost week. I have got
people in tomorrow, a school in on Friday afternoon, and more
next week. So I think people are keen to come. If I could just
ask Andy, in your research you did actually say that there appeared
to be a higher level of demand among those social class D E and
also older visitors, so in fact was one of your conclusions that
with a visitor centre you would be reaching out to groups that
we do not reach out to now?
Mr Martin: To a certain extent
yes, compared to your current user profile a slightly higher proportion
of DE's said that they would be interested in visiting.
Q71 Janet Anderson: On page 8 you
also mentioned older people, 45 to 59.
Mr Martin: Yes, indeed. 36% of
those aged 45 to 59 said that they were either "certain"
or "very likely" to visit whereas at the moment the
age profile is about 28% of your visitors. I would rephrase that:
38% of those who said they were very likely to visit were 45 to
59 compared to 28% of visitors, so it would clearly indicate that
the age profile might go up a little bit.
Q72 Chairman: Unless you have a concept
of what the content of the visitor centre is going to be, it is
very difficult to fix anything and if it was a positive educational
thing for children I think the figures may exceed it, if we made
it very sexy and very interesting, but Elizabeth Hallam Smith
is the Librarian of the House of Lords and she is chairing the
working group on content. How far have you got on deciding the
content?
Dr Hallam Smith: We have already
done some initial scoping work on the content. What we do have
at the moment is very valuable research which has already been
undertaken which gives us some working assumptions which we can
then feed into content development. We are about to appoint a
consultant from the museums sector who will help us and who will
work with the new project manager, Helen Wood, who I believe attended
the last of these meetings. What we will be doing is undertaking
a fairly iterative process. We are defining the user segments,
as I outlined earlier, and a lot of these have already been covered
by the evidence given today; schools, families, tourists, people
with an interest in the history and traditions of Parliament,
those with a keen interest in the democratic process, also those
who wish to come and meet Members. We will then be looking at
content which will appeal to each of those segments. There is
a possibility, I think, of controlling numbers up to a point,
and it will be possible to market certain types of content to
hard to reach groups, for example. Also I think it will be possible
to have timed tickets if there is a very high level of demand
and interest in the historical content, for example. We need to
look at all those issues very carefully. Our guiding principle
has to be of high quality, because I think that is absolutely
key, and of real substance for this visitor centre. It has got
to have something that people will really want to come and see
and to experience. It is great news that Members are keen to be
involved with visitors and with a visitor centre and I very much
hope that we will be able to involve Members once the centre is
up and running in working directly with school groups.
Mr Jones: My heart sinks when
you mention the word "consultants".
Mr Robathan: Hear hear.
Q73 Mr Jones: I have two questions,
firstly is how much is it going to cost and, secondly, what type
of consultants because my experience of consultants is the expertise
is in this room and possibly in these two buildings as to what
the content of this thing should be, and all a consultant will
do is pick your brains and feed it back to you slightly warmed
up and possibly in a nice, glossy brochure with a nice cover on,
with a hefty bill. So I am a bit wary of that. Also you say it
has got to be high quality. I do not disagree with that but it
must not be highbrow because, frankly, if it has got to appeal
to a lot of children, it has got to be pitched at the right level
in terms of not just looking at books in glass cabinets or stuffed
articles in glass cabinets but interactive things, which are there
already in many of our great museums which involve children getting
involved.
Dr Hallam Smith: I entirely agree
with your latter point, it has to be up-to-date and interactive
in the ways we have heard from our museum colleagues today, and
there are all sorts of exciting, cutting edge possibilities. The
Churchill Museum, for example, gives us a very good model of high
quality. It has to be state of the art with some cerebral stuff
as well, but I think the key thing is that each segment of content
has to appeal to the audience at which it is aimed.
Chairman: We have to identify more clearly
the target audience. I think the target audience is a bit vague.
Mr Robathan: Hear hear.
Chairman: I would exclude primary school
children totally because it will be very difficult to pitch something
to appeal to them whereas the Science Museum is targeted at primary
school children. We visited the museum and we have seen what they
are doing. It is directed to attract children from five or six.
It is very difficult to explain parliamentary concepts to five
and six-year-olds.
Mr Jones: I would disagree with
that. I had a group today of primary school kids from a primary
school's pupils' council and the material which is provided by
the Education Unit is aimed at primary school kids. I did it in
terms of Parliament is a bit like your school council with elections
and representation. There are ways of doing it and I would not
exclude them.
Chairman: I am sure there are, but if
the main thrust is going to be the history of Parliament and the
liberties we have won over the years in this great building, school
kids are not going to be interested in the Bill of Rights. They
might be interested in the execution of Charles I but they are
not going to be interested in all those other things. They certainly
do not want to know about the Act of Succession and the parliamentary
reforms of 1832. I would challenge you to explain those to primary
school children.
Mr Jones: I have a constituent
who writes the Horrible History series which makes history
very available to primary school kids and they love it.
Q74 Janet Anderson: I have got a
primary school coming on Friday afternoon and my experience of
primary school visits is that they do enjoy it. I think it is
possible to pitch it at their level. I do not know if anybody
else knows but in the Granada Studios tour in Manchester, which
is closed now, they did have a replica of the House of Commons
Chamber and I went there a couple of times with my children when
they were quite young and they had somebody dressed up as Black
Rod who got them to reenact a debate. It may be worth looking
at how popular it was then. Certainly whenever I went it seemed
to be very popular and that was not even in the context of being
in Parliament itself, it was in the back street of a studio in
Manchester.
Dr Hallam Smith: That is a great
idea. It needs to be a fun day out as well as something which
people will take away and remember and learn from.
Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe: My
reading of your findings is that it is a lot to do with the tour
as distinct from going to a visitor centre. We have got to be
clear in our heads who you saw today were on a tour, who you see
on Friday will be on a tour, and whether they need to go into
a visitor centre and, if so, for what purpose.
Q75 Chairman: I think that is the
fair point, quite frankly. You wanted to say something, Ms Banerjee?
Ms Banerjee: I have got some findings
that might help you understand the differences between primary
and secondary schools that I thought might be interesting to you,
and that is in terms of those definitely likely to visit in the
future. It is 22% of secondary schools versus 10% of primary schools.
So that gives you some idea of the level of interest between secondary
and primary schools so, yes, if it was going to be pitched towards
one or the other then be pitched towards secondary schools.
Baroness Prosser: I think we could
decide to make this an exciting prospect either for primary school
children or secondary school children or adults, whoever we so
decide, but what we do need to do is decide because I do not think
we can have a visitor centre that is going to be sufficiently
large and with sufficiently different spaces to take account of
all those different needs and demands, et cetera. So I think we
have got to make our minds up who it is we are going to be aiming
at and do that properly rather than fiddle about, shall we say,
trying to make it good for this one, good for that one, and in
the end we just will not have the space to be able to do it for
everyone.
Q76 Mr Gerrard: I would say my experience
of primary schools is that it works okay provided that there has
been enough preparation before they come. You talked in here about
giving support to teachers before they come. I think that is really
important. It just seems to me there ought to be scope if we get
a visitor centre, and I would be interested in your opinions,
to be able to offer some variety and to be able to do different
things with tours that are booked when a primary school group
is coming or a secondary school group is coming or even at certain
times of the year, particularly at times when Parliament is not
sitting, to offer perhaps people to book on something specialised
for one evening. Come and look at the art and architecture of
the building if that is what you are interested in. Come on a
specialised lecture about the history of the building, not something
you would necessarily offer every day but something that there
will be enough takers out there to make it work doing it on an
occasional basis. Do you get an impression that that is correct?
Ms Carnachan: That is a point
that was addressed by the teachers themselves. They did have some
concerns that it would be impossible to tailor the content and
that what would be of interest to an 18-year-old A level politics
student is clearly not going to be appropriate for a nine year
old. They did wonder how it would work in terms of the balance
of the item and who would get the most out of it. There was a
suggestion that could there not be some kind of themed weeks or
themed evenings or something like that, and if the schools were
told about it then they could book on to those things specifically,
rather than turning up and seeing whatever happens to be there
on a day-to-day basis. They certainly did wonder that it might
try to be all things to everybody and not quite hit the nail on
the head for specific groups.
Lord Craig of Radley: I would
just like to pose a question: if a school has the opportunity
of getting their local MP to show them round, is that going to
be more attractive or less attractive than going to the visitor
centre or is it a duplication, and do we want to set up such a
duplication? I do not know, I am just raising a question.
Chairman: Who would take them through
the visitor centre?
Q77 Lord Craig of Radley: That is
one side. A totally different one is how important really are
the catering/eating arrangements? Your research talks about it
having mixed views but in the totality of the cost of the building,
adding all the catering provision for that is going to be quite
expensive and it seems to me we have got to be very clear whether
we want to go down that track before we go into it.
Ms Banerjee: Can I take the point
about the opportunity to meet MPs. Part of the quantitative research
that we did with teachers was to have a list of about 10 or so
features and asking them how appealing each of them would be.
The one that came out top was the opportunity to meet MPs and
Peers. 77% of schools overall were interested on that.
Q78 Mr Robathan: A museum with living
exhibits!
Mr Martin: Just following on the
catering, the range of views was largely down to the fact that
people did not know how long they would spend here. If they are
going to spend more than a couple of hours then they are going
to want somewhere to eat and drink.
Q79 Lord Craig of Radley: Not necessarily
provided by us.
Mr Martin: Generally nowadays
there is an expectation that on site there will be a shop, there
will be—
| 
