1 Introduction
The role of a Member of Parliament
1. We have recognised from the outset of this inquiry
that the starting-point for any consideration of sitting hours
and the Parliamentary calendar must be an appreciation of what
it is that a Member of Parliament actually does.
2. Any well-informed reader of this report will recognise
that the role of a Member of Parliament has changed constantly
over the years, and will continue to do so. He or she will also
know that there are as many different roles as there are Members
of Parliament. Former Leader of the House Jack Straw, answering
a question on whether it would be possible or desirable to codify
the role of an MP into a job description, replied
It would be very much just generally descriptive
because, after all, the job of the MP is to represent his or her
constituents in the way that his or her constituents wish him
or her to represent them, those constituents in that town, full
stop.[1]
Each area's constituents will wish their MP to serve
them in different ways; and each area's MP will have different
ways of undertaking that service.
3. It is nonetheless possible to summarise the role
of an MP in a way which is helpful to a consideration of what
it means for the sitting patterns of the House. The Speaker's
Conference on Parliamentary Representation, which met in the last
Parliament and reported in January 2010, did so as follows:
81. An MP has a number of responsibilities. The main
ones are:
- as a legislator, debating, making and reviewing
laws and government policy within Parliament; and
- as an advocate for the constituency he or she
represents. The MP can speak for the interests and concerns of
constituents in Parliamentary debates and, if appropriate, intercede
with Ministers on their behalf. The MP can speak either on behalf
of the constituency as a whole, or to help individual constituents
who are in difficulty (an MP represents all their constituents,
whether or not the individual voted for them). Within the constituency
an MP and his or her staff will seek to support individual constituents
by getting information for them or working to resolve a problem.
82. In addition some MPs will:
- Take on an additional role as a Government Minister;
- Take on a formal role within Parliament, supporting
the Speaker by chairing committees or debates; or
- Have a formal role to play within their political
party, for example, being a spokesperson, co-ordinating a campaign
or advising the party leadership on a particular area of policy.
83. A good MP will make a positive difference to
the community he or she represents. An MP can express the concerns
of their community to Parliament and ensure people's experiences
are recorded and understood. He or she can press for changes which
will increase the community's wellbeing and prosperity. An MP
has the authority to bring different people and agencies together
to address an awkward problem. When someone has to take on 'the
system'—perhaps to secure the right care package for a relative,
or to correct a miscarriage of justice—an MP can often support
them and help them through. An MP will bring their knowledge and
understanding of their constituents' lives, concerns and interests,
as well as their own life experience, to bear on their work.
84. It is important to recognise that a Member's
responsibilities rest jointly and concurrently at Westminster
and in the constituency. It is a modern requirement of the job
that a Member has an office in both places and there is a strong
public expectation that when not required at Westminster, Members
will actively participate in the life of the constituency, including
at weekends. Hence it is important to recognise that both Westminster
and their constituency are places of work for MPs.[2]
4. This is an extraordinarily demanding role. The
evidence we have gathered in the course of this inquiry—not
only from Members themselves, but also from external observers
and commentators such as the Hansard Society—shows clearly
the enormous pressure which Members of Parliament are under from
the competing demands of constituency, party and their role in
the House itself. Members of Parliament work extraordinarily long
hours. The Hansard Society's survey of new Members showed them
working an average of 69 hours/week, with travel time of 8 hours
on top of that.[3] Our
own survey echoed those results, suggesting that most Members
work 70 hours/week or more while the House is sitting.[4]
MPs take few holidays, and may not be entirely "off duty"
even then, often feeling that they need to stay in touch with
events in the constituency even while away with the family.[5]
The Hansard Society reported that responses to their survey on
the question of the effect of becoming a Member on personal/family
life were "universally negative"[6],
a finding again backed up by our own survey of Members, which
found that some 55% of Members were dissatisfied to some extent
with their work/life balance.[7]
5. We do not make these observations in order to
complain about our lot. All Members are here voluntarily: no-one
has compelled us to stand for election and it is for us as individuals
to find a way of coping with the demands of the job in a way which
suits us, our families, and those who have sent us here—our
constituents. Rather, we wish to demonstrate that we have borne
in mind in the course of this inquiry the need for both sitting
hours and the Parliamentary calendar to support, so far as possible,
not only Members' work both in their constituency and at Westminster,
but also the need for them to maintain some semblance of normal
family life.
6. The issue emerging particularly strongly from
the evidence to this inquiry was the huge increase over time in
the constituency workload. Much could be said about the reasons
for that: from the rise of "pavement politics" and campaigning
on local issues, to the increased propensity to complain about
poor service from state agencies, to the introduction of e-mail
and improved ease of communication with elected representatives.
Whatever the reasons it is clear that these pressures, once raised,
are very unlikely to diminish. We have therefore focussed on what
those pressures mean for sitting hours and the Parliamentary calendar.
The growth in the constituency caseload has not in any way diminished
the importance of a Member's work at Westminster (notwithstanding
the finding of our survey that, given more time, significantly
more Members would spend it in the constituency, or on constituency
work, than on parliamentary work at Westminster).[8]
But it does mean that Westminster sitting patterns need to reflect
the growth of this call on Members' time, as well as Parliamentary
work at Westminster and the need for a family life. As Tony Lloyd,
appearing before us in his capacity as Chair of the Parliamentary
Labour Party, told us,
One of the things that colleagues have said to me
is that, of course, the nature of being a Member of Parliament
has changed and continues to change. The various pressures—such
as electronic communications and the capacity for people to communicate
more—do not actually lessen the role of the Member of Parliament
as constituency representative and, in actual fact, while you
may talk about the work/life balance for some occupations, because
MPs have almost two distinct working roles, that of parliamentary
representative and that of constituency representative, it is
really a matter of the work/work/life balance that we are talking
about.[9]
7. We are also conscious of the fact that each Member
of Parliament has a different way of working, and that in looking
at the sitting hours of the House there are no mainstream options
which are necessarily 'right or wrong', 'out-dated or modern',
or 'effective or less so'. The whole issue is largely a matter
of individual preference. We therefore acknowledge that there
are differing views which will need to be resolved by the House.
The current sitting hours were inherited by this House from its
predecessor and it is right that the House elected in 2010 now
have the opportunity to decide its preference about the hours
that it sits. Individual Members should take their decision on
the matter based on what they feel is the best working practice
for them to better serve Parliament and their own constituents;
and whilst issues of cost-effectiveness and value for money should
certainly be an important factor in that decision, we would expect
both the House administration and the expenses regime to support
to as full an extent as necessary the conclusions which the House,
collectively, reaches about its sitting patterns.
Our inquiry
8. This has been a long and thorough inquiry, in
the course of which we have attempted to give Members and others
as much opportunity as possible to have an input into our deliberations.
We began with a call for evidence in March 2011, to which we received
responses not only from Members and others within the House such
as the trades unions and the Members' and Peers' Staff Association
(MAPSA) but also from former Members and from external commentators
and organisations such as the Hansard Society. We took oral evidence
from Dr Ruth Fox of the Hansard Society and Prof Sarah Childs
of the University of Bristol in June 2011, and followed that up
with evidence from a number of Members and former Members in September
2011. We then drew the evidence we had received up to that point
together into a consultation document indicating the direction
in which it was leading us, which we published in November 2011.
Finally, in January and February of this year we took oral evidence
from the trades unions and MAPSA, the Chairs of the Administration
and Finance and Services Committees, the Clerk of the House and
other House officials, and the Leader of the House and Shadow
Leader . We also pursued certain issues in writing with both the
Clerk of the House and the Speaker.
9. We are very grateful to all those who have sent
us written evidence and appeared before us in person. We received
in the course of the inquiry a number of very interesting and
radical suggestions, not all of which we have been able to follow
up. We have nevertheless greatly appreciated the willingness of
individuals from both inside and outside the House to bring forward
their ideas, and we encourage people to continue to think radically
and creatively about how the House of Commons, both through its
sitting patterns and in other ways, can best enable its members
to fulfil their many and varied duties as Members of Parliament.
1 Q 50 Back
2
Speaker's Conference (on Parliamentary Representation): Final
Report, HC (2010-12) 239, 11 January 2010. Back
3
Ev w14 Back
4
Results from the survey of Members (published with written evidence) Back
5
Q 98 Back
6
Ev w15 Back
7
Results from the survey of Members Back
8
Results from the survey of Members, Ev w97 Back
9
Q 64; Ev w97 Back
|
