House of Commons - Administration

Select Committee on Administration Minutes of Evidence

Memorandum submitted by the Hansard Society

1. INTRODUCTION

The Hansard Society welcomes the opportunity to submit evidence to the sub-committee's inquiry into a Parliamentary Visitor Centre. We have tried to address as many points as possible from your letter of 16 May 2006 but you will see that we have not answered all your queries as some are beyond our scope, for example, the location of any future Visitor Centre.

Our evidence draws on the Hansard Society's report An Interpretative Visitor Centre at Parliament, which was presented to the Group on the Information of the Public (GIP) in May 2005 as part of our Enhancing Engagement project. [1]It draws on qualitative and quantitative research conducted by the Hansard Society on attitudes to politics and Parliament. [2]We also refer to the conclusions and recommendations of the report of the Hansard Society's Commission on the Communication of Parliamentary Democracy, chaired by Lord Puttnam. [3]We address specific questions asked by the inquiry in its call for evidence, and provide further evidence which we believe is relevant to the discussion on a visitor centre.

2. ABOUT THE HANSARD SOCIETY

Established in 1944, the Hansard Society is an independent, non-partisan educational charity that operates across the political spectrum to strengthen the democratic process and improve the relationship between the public, elected representatives and political institutions. The Hansard Society works to promote effective parliamentary democracy, by carrying out an intensive programme of work aimed at strengthening the political system and enhancing engagement in civic and political life.

Our work is divided into five main programmes:

— Citizenship Education—carries out practical, ground level work with citizens of all ages and backgrounds (but especially young people) that aims to broaden understanding, knowledge and participation in the political system.

— E-democracy—carries out pioneering research into how new technologies could enhance and improve the democratic process, specifically: applying technology to improving participation amongst people of all ages in the democratic process and to encouraging elected representatives to experiment with new tools of consultation and engagement.

— Parliament and Government—undertakes high-level research to stimulate reform of political institutions and the law-making process, and looks at new ways to enhance engagement between the public and our political institutions.

— Study and Scholars—runs one of the most prestigious educational courses on British politics. Primarily for overseas students, the course is accredited by the London School of Economics and Political Science, and provides an ideal opportunity for those who wish to experience both academic and hands-on experience in the political process.

— Hansard Society Scotland—based in Edinburgh, which looks at ways to inform and educate citizens of all ages about the Scottish Parliament and wider political institutions (including EU and Westminster) and provides an independent platform for debate regarding development of the new Parliament.

In addition, during 2004-05 we ran a Hansard Society Commission:

— Hansard Society Commission on the Communication of Parliamentary Democracy—The Hansard Society periodically establishes independent public policy commissions to examine in depth key political issues and to make recommendations for change. Previous commissions have radically improved the law making and modernisation processes in Parliament. Parliament in the Public Eye chaired by Lord David Puttnam, investigated the relationship between Parliament, the public and the media and made recommendations for change in May 2005.

3. DOES PARLIAMENT NEED A VISITOR CENTRE? WHAT SHOULD IT BE FOR?

A visitor centre can be used to address barriers to public engagement with Parliament. Many such barriers were identified by qualitative and quantitative research conducted for the Hansard Society in 2004 and 2005: [4]

— Public knowledge about governance in the UK, for example, the difference between Parliament and Government and between the two Houses, is low. There is also very little knowledge about what Parliament does, and in particular what Parliament does outside the main Chamber and PMQs.

— People have little interest in the work of Parliament—seeing little connection between the work it performs and their day to day life.

— Views of Parliament are formed "in the dark" and often based on superficial views of politicians which tend to be negative, or on media coverage, that even the public frequently criticises as cynical. People see Parliament almost solely on the basis of set adversarial events such as PMQs which elicited criticisms that the chamber resembled a "kids playground".

— People are resentful of the perceived lack of opportunities for members of the public to "have a say" in the work of Parliament. There is also suspicion that public consultations are an attempt to placate the public rather than a genuine opportunity to hear their views.

— Consequently many see the institution as exclusive and inward looking, and believe that there is little point—or prospect—in getting actively involved in its work.

In our report on an interpretative visitor, we concluded:

"While Parliament can do little to change public perceptions of politicians, it can create a different lens through which people view the institution, by pro-actively and directly informing members of the public about its work . . . A visitor centre at Parliament could be an important part of this lens. Visitor centres can be an effective way of building public awareness and understanding of issues, persons and the work of political institutions. They can also be a good way of injecting a welcoming atmosphere into institutions which, by their nature, require high levels of security."

The demand for a visitor centre was also confirmed by a consultation we conducted with young people in February 2005. The participants believed that having a visitor centre would make visiting Parliament a more informative and welcoming experience, with some citing the example of the (former) visitor centre at the Scottish Parliament, which they felt was "excellent and informative" and "immediately made you feel involved."

4. WHAT SHOULD A VISITOR CENTRE NOT BE FOR?

It is important that a visitor centre only forms one component of Parliament's strategy to engage with a wider audience and is not seen as the only answer to public disengagement. Many of the most politically disengaged sections of society are also the most socially excluded and may not be able or willing to travel to Parliament. In addition as a survey of citizenship teachers confirmed, while a visitor centre would make it more likely that they take their students on a visit to Parliament, there were many pressures—particularly time and cost related—that would prevent schools located far away from London from bringing their students to the visitor centre. Any plans to design a visitor centre should therefore be accompanied by a comprehensive outreach strategy designed to provide access to Parliament at a local level where people live.

In addition, a visitor centre should complement and not replace existing opportunities to visit Parliament, including the main chamber and select committees. In particular, Parliament in Action tours of Parliament, based on the model developed in the Hansard Society's Connecting Communities project, should be offered to members of the public. [5]There is a perception that the Capitol Visitor Centre, being developed in Washington DC is being developed to replace public access to the Congress. While there are understandable security concerns which should be a consideration for any legislature, it is important that it continues to provide a welcoming, interesting and informative environment for members of the public who wish to visit.

5. DESIGNING A VISITOR CENTRE

The aim of a visitor centre should be to promote knowledge, understanding and engagement with Parliament as an institution. However it should be not designed in a way that makes people feel they are being force fed information or told how to think. This is demonstrated by the case of the visitor centre at Sellafield Nuclear Power Station, which was originally criticised as propagandist and was subsequently redesigned as an exhibition to provoke a debate on alternative sources of energy rather than merely making a case for the nuclear industry. A similar approach was used in developing the successful Churchill Museum, which opened in the Cabinet War Rooms in 2005.

A successful exhibition should be built with the following objectives in mind: [6]

A. Provoke interest

It is crucially important to spark visitors' interest at the start of the exhibition. This can be done in a number of ways:

— At the entrance to the Churchill Museum visitors are instantly intrigued when greeted by a little known quote from Churchill ("We are all worms, but I believe I am a glow worm"). Similarly at the entrance to the main exhibition at Sellafield, thought-stimulating words about energy and nuclear power are projected on to the floor.

— Displays at the Churchill Museum tell you about the more controversial aspects of Churchill (including his controversial role in bringing in the army to quell a strike), as well as other lesser known sides to Churchill (eg his support for a state pension), which, once again make you want to know more.

— Particularly at the start of an exhibition or centre it is crucial to avoid bombarding visitors with large amounts of textual information. Instead, appeal to different senses: with interactive displays, visual material, sound and so on.

— Several English Heritage visitor centres (such as at Whitby Abbey) have interactive terminals chronicling a day in the life of a historical figure. Interest in the display at Parliament could be provoked via an interactive terminal chronicling the life of an MP in the past, present and future.

Connecting Young People with Parliament

A visitor centre in Parliament should aim to provoke the visitor's interest in the work of Parliament, and to leave wanting to know more.

B. Relate to personal experience

Our research suggests that one of the reasons for a lack of public interest in Parliament is the fact that people do not see how it affects their lives. For example, for many people the work of Parliament is represented by Prime Minister's Question Time, which they see as "bickering between parties" or a "kids' playground" and which has little effect on or relevance to their lives. [7]

The display at the visitor centre should make the connection between the work of Parliament and people's day-to-day lives by highlighting the varied work of Parliament, which has a direct impact on people's lives.

For example displays and a short documentary highlighting the work of select committees (and interviews with current members or chairs) could be included to demonstrate the relevance of their work to people's lives. Showing the relevance of Parliament is one of the core objectives of the Visitor Welcome Centre at the Canadian Parliament, and the main exhibition presents a picture of the different work carried out by parliamentarians: including in the chamber, the committee, the constituency, and cabinet.

C. Reveal information

As highlighted in our interim report there is a low level of public knowledge about the work of Parliament, and the material in a visitor centre should take account of this.

The visitor centre at the Welsh Assembly provides a good example of how this can be done. The displays include basic information about the Parliament, its history and how it works, as well as information on how it fits into the overall structure of governance. The information is kept simple: interactive displays, computer terminals with access to the website and pamphlets provide more details.

In addition to this, the participants in Connecting Parliament with Young People felt that the centre should advertise the fact that you can receive e-mail updates from Parliament, allowing you to develop your knowledge even further. They also suggested that the display contain an archive of key parliamentary speeches for people to browse through (similar to the speech archive at the Churchill Museum).

While allowing for low levels of knowledge about Parliament the target should be the Highest Common Factor rather than the Lowest Common Denominator. [8]It should not make any assumptions about what people know, nor should it treat people as stupid or spoon feed them.

This is the aim of the interactive timeline at the Churchill Museum, and the quizzes at the Sellafield centre.

As noted earlier it is crucial to provide a balanced account in an exhibition—evidence suggests that people react negatively (and view as propagandist) displays that merely highlight the virtues of a person or institution and skirt over its more controversial aspects. Participants in Connecting Parliament with Young People suggest including a screen with clips from events outside Parliament, such as different protests that have taken place over the history of Parliament. For example, the Sellafield Visitor Centre includes displays from anti-nuclear campaigners and a discussion of the major accident which took place at the plant in 1957, and the Churchill Museum addresses his controversial actions as Home Secretary, and includes the views of critics of his policies.

D. Entertain

The displays at the visitor centre should not rely on large tracts of text about Parliament, but should use a variety of media to engage and entertain the audience:

— Interactive terminals: for example the interactive quizzes at the Sellafield visitor centre are both informative and entertaining (similarly the Timeline at the Churchill Museum).

— Audio-visual displays: short documentaries on the history of Parliament (highlighting crucial moments in the history), and interviews with Parliamentarians and parliamentary commentators (similar to the documentary in the Welsh Assembly, and those at the Churchill Museum).

— Michael Glen is emphatic that humour is a vital ingredient for an exhibition, and repudiates the suggestion that it trivialises or belittles. For example, at the Churchill Museum cartoons by David Lowe are used to bring visitors' attention to different aspects of Churchill's life.

E. Involve:

"Tell me and I forget, remind me and I remember, but involve me and I understand."

This old Chinese proverb is a favourite of the former Speaker, Lord Wetherill, and highlights the importance of involving people in order to build knowledge and understanding (and in the long term their perception).

For example, an interactive display at the Churchill Museum presents different points of view on Churchill and Chamberlain and asks people to vote on whether a statement (suggesting that Chamberlain was an "appeaser" and Churchill a "strong leader") is true. Similarly at the Sellafield exhibition, an interactive display allows people to consider different energy options (and hear the cases for and against), and vote on their choice. The "Home" section of the Hansard Society's House to Home exhibition likewise encouraged people to hear a range of views about smoking in pubic places, and then vote on it. [10]In the case of the latter feedback from visitors about the exhibition suggest that the interactive nature of the event was particularly popular among visitors. In all three cases visitors build their knowledge and understanding of issues by being involved in a deliberative exercise.

In the interim report we highlighted research which suggests that people are often put off politics by the perceived partisanship of politicians. An interactive display at the visitor centre in Parliament could include a similar display asking people to select the best way of building a democratic system after hearing the case for alternative ones (and thus highlighting the crucial role that parties play).

Dinah Casson notes that involving people is particularly effective when visitors are invited to "make your mark", and leave a lasting impression on the exhibition. [11]This was confirmed by the success of the brainstorming tents at the Hansard Society's House to Home exhibition in Parliament, where members of the public, and politicians, posted thousands of post-it notes with ideas about how Parliament could engage with them, encouraging them to think about issues, and engage in a dialogue with one another.

F. Widen Horizons

This is perhaps the most important objective of an exhibition, as the core aim of the centre is to stimulate public engagement with the institution.

Hansard Society research suggests that a major obstacle to further public involvement in the work of Parliament is the perception that there are few genuine opportunities to get involved, and that politicians do not listen to the public. The visitor centre in Parliament should strive to combat this perception by highlighting the different ways that people can get involved in Parliament's work—through elections and other means such as online consultations, petitions and so on. In addition sections highlighting, for example, the suffragette movement, could demonstrate how getting involved does make a difference, while at the same time chronicling an important part of Parliament's history.

The young people involved in Connecting Parliament with Young People were particularly keen that the displays include sections on how individuals can get involved in the work of Parliament, how to contact your MP, and opportunities to email them.

6. WHO SHOULD BE THE MAIN TARGET AUDIENCE FOR A VISITOR CENTRE? HOW SHOULD PARLIAMENT ATTRACT THAT AUDIENCE?

The parliamentary visitor centre should provide a welcoming atmosphere for all visitors with an emphasis on members of British public rather than oversees tourists. In addition, in designing the centre, there should an awareness that disengagement from the political process is particularly strong amongst the following groups:

Young people: The Puttnam Commission argued that the introduction of citizenship education as a statutory subject in secondary schools in England presents Parliament with a "historic opportunity" to communicate its value to young people and involve them in its activities. It recommended that:

At the same time Parliament must take steps to actively involve young people not within the education system. Young people aged 16-24 are widely regarded as a particularly disengaged group and one of the main target groups of the Electoral Commission's outreach strategy. Electoral Commission research, for example, following the 2005 general election suggests a "cohort effect" with "younger age groups losing (or never gaining) the habit of voting and carrying forward their lack of interest in voting into older age." [13]

BME groups: While Britain's Indian community is more likely to vote than UK's white population, the people least likely to vote (and with the lowest levels of electoral registration) are of black Caribbean and black African heritage. 47% of people from BME voted while 62% of those classed as white turned out. There is also evidence that there has been a decline in participation among formerly active groups such as the Muslim community. [14]

More broadly there is a clear link between political disengagement and social exclusion. Key drivers of social exclusion include: unemployment, low income, education skills and training deprivation, health deprivation and disability, access to transport, crime levels, neighbourhood and housing.

Designing a visitor centre along the lines suggested in the previous section would help Parliament engage with these target audiences and with the wider British public. Overall the emphasis should be on demonstrating that Parliament is a working political institution, rather than just a historic building. It must also demonstrate the relevance of Parliament to people's lives, particularly by emphasising work outside the main Commons chamber. In addition consideration should be given to the following:

— Creating a young person consultative group. There is increasing emphasis in government on the importance in involving young people not only on the design of services for them but on wider issues that relate to them. Creating a young person's consultative group on a visitor centre would help ensure that the facilities provided are mindful of the needs, concerns and interests of young people.

— Providing materials in different languages. Materials, including leaflets, publications and audio tours, at the centre should be available in the languages of the UK's main ethnic minority groups.

— Tapping into civic networks. Awareness of the visitor centre should be raised by tapping into the networks and associations that Parliament's target groups are involved in—such as by contacting temples or mosques or through youth groups.

— Maximising accessibility. The centre and its facilities should have full disabled access and should provide a free créche for visitors.