Are the Lords listening? Creating connections between people and Parliament - Information Committee Contents


Memorandum by Debatewise

SUBMISSION TO THE HOUSE OF LORDS INQUIRY: PEOPLE AND PARLIAMENT

  Debatewise.com welcomes the opportunity to help the inquiry into how the House of Lords could relate better to the public. Debatewise is a non-profit debating website which aims to become the Wikipedia for debate. Because we are based on the wiki model, anyone can add or edit debates and points within those debates. We keep our editing to an absolute minimum (i.e just filtering out abusive language) so the content of the site really is the opinions of the public on the issues that matter to them. We help the public form and engage in debates online, and we see a substantial connection between our activities and the aims of the Lords in terms of relating to the public. It is for this reason that we believe our evidence to be useful to the Inquiry and are delighted with the opportunity to participate.

1.  HOUSE OF LORDS OUTREACH PROGRAMME

  1.1  Debatewise supports the efforts being made by the House of Lords through its outreach programme. We applaud any attempt to provide greater information and transparency about the parliamentary process and the role that the House of Lords plays in this.

1.2  The appointment of a dedicated programme co-ordinator provides a valuable central point of contact, whilst web and other online activities enable people who may hitherto have felt disengaged to better understand how decisions taken on their behalf, are made. For example, the posts on the Lords of the Blog inform people about the day to day activities of Lords as well as issues they are involved in.

2.  SUGGESTED EXPANSION OF THE OUTREACH PROGRAM

  2.1  The House of Lords outreach to schools has made progress in improving the accessibility of the House of Lords. So far, however, the program has been of limited scope in terms of age range. University students take great interest in current affairs and have the time to fully engage in discussion around them—universities are often hives of political activity—yet this appears to remain untapped.

2.2  Of the Debatewise team of volunteer political content writers, 38 out of 40 are full-time university students from across the country. This demonstrates a conscious nationwide effort on the part of this age bracket to engage in debates and participate in society. Between 18 and 21 young people form opinions and behaviour patterns that stay with them for the rest of their lives, so it is important to instil in them a desire for political engagement. The House of Lords should be maximizing this potential by visiting universities and otherwise engaging with this demographic at every opportunity.

3.  HAVING ACCESS TO INFORMATION IMPROVES UNDERSTANDING AND CREATES REASSURANCE

  3.1  A great deal of information about the House of Lords is accessible online, however at Debatewise we believe that the provision of information online is only one part of the equation. The rise of web 2.0 technologies both in terms of innovation and popularity, points to the need for a more pro-active shift in thinking about how parliament can, and, in our opinion should, engage with the wider public and young people in particular.

3.2  Our experience at Debatewise shows that the communication preferences for young people revolve around technology. The popularity of web 2.0 functionalities shows that young people often feel more comfortable expressing their opinions via websites and other types of technologically-based social interaction than they do face to face, and we foresee many opportunities for the House of Lords to capitalize on that.

4.  ONLINE DEBATE AS A WAY TO ENGAGE PEOPLE AND INCREASE PARTICIPATION

  4.1  At Debatewise we believe young people disengage from society only when they feel powerless over it. In order to increase their participation in politics we need to give them the sense that their views matter, that they can be effective and that they can change things. Debatewise achieves this by teaching them debating skills—valuable transferable skills they can use articulate themselves effectively in all arenas. They can then express their views in a way they know will be understood, which reinforces the sense that these opinions will be listened to and acted upon by their peers, by society at large, or both.

4.2  Many young people would profess no interest in a chamber debate, yet regularly engage in heated online debates about the same issues. Debatewise gets over 650 visits a day from people like this. We think this is for two main reasons:

  4.3  Firstly, debates online give anyone an outlet for their views, not just nominated speakers or experts. Most people have an opinion on current affairs issues, but not everyone has a place where they can voice it, freely, to others. The fact that this can be done anonymously on the internet means even the most shy amongst us would be willing to say their piece.

  4.4  Secondly, these young people state they are attracted to debating online because the anonymity of the internet is a great leveller. The anonymity means that those who read views do so without prejudice or undue weight attached to those views. For the House of Lords this makes online debate very beneficial as people feel that whilst politicians may not listen to their views offline, the internet allows them to fully engage in a debate where their views are heard.

  4.5  An even more effective way to empower people would be with an open and transparent feedback mechanism into political forums. We are working with the House of Lords on a system where debates created by schools on our training program will link with scheduled debates in the House. The issues would be debated online by young people before the event and the results could be cited by speakers as evidence. This would go a way towards de-mystifying the political process for the young people involved: the Lords would become infinitely more accessible and transparent to them, and there would be an obvious pathway from the voicing of their opinions, to the Lords' consideration of their views.

  4.6  We feel this scheme would be a really positive step towards engaging school children by assuring them their voice matters. If it is successful we would like to extend it to a wider audience, and deepen the connection with the Lords. Perhaps through a designated part of the site (freely accessible to the general public) that hosts debates on issues scheduled to be discussed in the House.

  4.7  Outlined below we have put together two case studies from our experience in online debating. These illustrate how Debatewise provides a platform for the wider public to voice their opinions and we hope these studies may help to demonstrate how the Lords could capitalise on online engagement.

5.  CASE STUDY: DEBATE 807 "TORTURE SHOULD BE ALLOWED AGAINST TERROR SUSPECTS"

  5.1  This case study demonstrates the need of the public for more ways to engage in meaningful debate about issues that affect them, and their willingness to do so online. The debate was created on 20 April 2009 and at time of writing [1 May 2009] is currently the top link to appear on Google when "torture against terror suspects" is entered. Contributors have created a total of four points in favour and three points against the argument in the space of just over two weeks (see figs 1 and 2).

Figure 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF POINTS MADE ON TORTURE DEBATE


5.2  The points were quickly answered by counterarguments (see fig 2), demonstrating how lively, intelligent debates about topical issues can—and will—rapidly flourish online, and that this is a fantastic way for the House of Lords to engage the public.

Figure 2

EXAMPLE OF POINT (LEFT) AND COUNTERPOINT ADDED AGAINST IT (RIGHT)


6.  CASE STUDY 2: DEBATE 137 "SPACE EXPLORATION IS A WASTE OF MONEY"

  6.1  This case study is an example of two other key functions of our online debates. Although Debatewise aims to encourage participation and engagement, people also use us as a resource to become better informed, and, ultimately, make up their minds on an issue. This is of interest because it provides an example of how the House of Lords could increase transparency (see 6.3) and also gain feedback (see 6.4)

6.2  Our debate on space exploration was created on 9 April and since then it has had 2,000 page views. Whilst this is not remarkable for a web page, the unusually high average "time on page" for these visitors (05:6 minutes) suggests that people are reading and digesting the arguments thoroughly before making a decision on the issue. Visitors are invited to vote on the issue and this acts as a way of gauging public opinion. On this particular topic 38% agree that space exploration is a "waste of money" (see fig 3.)

Figure 3

VOTE TOTALS FOR THE SPACE EXPLORATION DEBATE


  6.3  The idea that people are increasingly coming to view debates online, in order to make up their minds is applicable to the Lords in terms transparency. If the arguments put forth by speakers in Lords debates were displayed online in this accessible fashion, this would do wonders for the image of the House of Lords as an open and transparent institution.

  6.4  In turn, becoming more transparent and having a higher profile would, of course, encourage people to engage further with the House of Lords' activities. The engagement itself would be made easier (as there is a simple voting system) and thus there would be a very simple mechanism for gaining feedback and public opinion on debates.

  6.5  The best way to maximise public engagement with the Lords would be to combine online and real world debates. If pre, mid and post debates were run online alongside a debate in the Lords, people would be able to comment and give their opinions at all stages of the process. The Lords already televises some debates so the live streaming of debates on the internet—with an arena for public input—is the logical next step.

  6.6  Although online opinion polls can often be unreliable, as they are accessible to all and thus open to unfair practice, at Debatewise we have overcome this through introducing a privacy facility, thus restricting who can vote (if necessary).

7.  CONCLUSION

  7.1  To date the House of Lords' attempts to engage and involve the public have been very successful. Through school visits and online presence the Lords has reduced it's reputation for being a slightly outdated or inaccessible institution, by showing it is focussing on youth and is in touch with changing media. Despite the progress made so far there is still much more that can be done, both with youth (especially the university age bracket) and online (through utilising the phenomenon of online debate).

7.3  We hope that through the evidence we have submitted Debatewise has demonstrated the pressing need to engage and interact with young people online and also presented potential avenues for doing so. Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this Inquiry and we wish you the best of luck with your findings.

May 2009



 
previous page contents next page

House of Lords home page Parliament home page House of Commons home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2009