UNISON is the UK's largest public service union with more than 1.3 million members. Our members are people working in the public services, for private contractors providing public services and in the essential utilities. They include frontline staff and managers, working full or part time in local authorities, the NHS, the police service, colleges and schools, the electricity, gas and water industries, transport and the voluntary sector. Over 70% of our members are women; many are low paid or work part time. We organise more black workers than any other organisation and have actively contributed to key debates on tackling racism and promoting community cohesion.

  The UNISON rulebook includes provision for fair representation of the whole of our membership, including fair representation of men and women, also taking into account age and low pay, the balance between full time and part

time workers, manual and non-manual workers, different occupations, skills, race, sexual orientation, disability and gender identity.

  We welcome the opportunity to contribute to this Speaker's conference, but regret the exclusion of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) people from the inquiry's terms of reference. UNISON believes that the fair representation of LGBT people is also important. We recognise the problem of the lack of official information about the percentage of them in the population. UNISON supports the campaign to include a question to monitor sexual orientation in the census, if it was possible for confidentiality to be maintained. We also regret that the issue of young voter participation is not included in the terms of reference, especially in the context of the ongoing consultation by the Youth Citizenship Commission on voting age and their remit to look at young people's engagement.

Are problems caused by the unbalanced representation in the House of Commons of different groups in society?

  Yes.

  UNISON believes that our political structures inevitably reflect wider citizenship discrepancies. In society, and in the workplace, we still see the maintenance of relative hierarchies and systemic discrimination. For instance women, LGBT, disabled and Black people are still under-represented in the upper echelons of the workplace and in our civil institutions. The same is true in terms of class and socio-economic disadvantage. We welcome the opportunity to address some of the related issues which the Government recently signalled in its proposed White Paper. The under-representation of certain groups in the House of Commons reinforces the divides within society.

If so, what are those problems?

  UNISON believes that democratic structures need to reflect the identities of the people they represent if they are to be effective and to be perceived as legitimate. Currently there is a lack of confidence in democratic structures and a sense of alienation from the political process, demonstrated by the low turnout in elections. The experiences and knowledge from our different groups of members contributes within our organisation to a more rounded and inclusive policy making process.

Is there a relationship between these levels of representation and voter attitudes to Parliament?

  Yes. UNISON has self organised groups representing under represented people—women, disabled members, LGBT members and Black members. These groups consistently tell us that a more representative democracy would lead to a greater sense of engagement and trust in democratic decision making.

  We would also highlight the negative effect the media can have on people's perceptions of politicians and the potential knock on effect of this discouraging people from getting involved in politics.

  However the recent experience in the US Presidential election suggests that it is possible to reverse the lack of participation by certain groups.

  It is important to also recognise that equality groups are not the only issue in terms of representation in Parliament. It is vital that we recognise the role of class in representation. It is important that people from across society can see people they identify with in Parliament. Trade unions are the main route through which working class people receive the support and mentoring that is necessary to become a Member of Parliament.

What are the reasons why more women, people from ethnic minorities and disabled people do not become Members of Parliament:

Why don't more from these groups consider standing for election?

Or, if they do,

— Why aren't more of them selected? Or, if they are,

— Why aren't more of them elected?


  The reasons why more people from under represented groups do not stand for elected office are complex and rooted in systemic long term discrimination in broader society.


  Although the under representation of women, Black people and disabled people, as well as LGBT people, is important, it is impossible to understand the barriers if it is not recognised that the underlying economic, class based inequality is the reason behind many of the barriers. Disabled people, Black people and women are all more likely to be poor, and live with structural discrimination which links to economic status. Further serious attention has to be given to the under-representation in, and alienation from the political processes, of younger voters.


  In 2005 UNISON published the findings of a research project called Transformations, which explored factors and issues that motivate women to take on positions in union structures. Many of the findings of that report were also relevant to participation in other areas of public life.


  One of the findings of the report was that women are likely to become active in their union through social networks and friendships. There is also evidence that those with an existing history of family involvement are more likely to engage with the political processes. This can have the effect of maintaining the status quo. This supports widespread evidence that "like recruits like" and that women and people from ethnic minority backgrounds are more likely to get involved in an organisation such as a political party if there are people that they identify with who are already involved. There is widespread evidence of this both within trade unions and within local politics. In a situation where the majority of MPs are male and the majority of people in positions and professions that often lead to standing for Parliament are white and male, people who are currently under represented are less likely to receive the informal mentoring or have the role models that encourage them to stand and which helps build success.


  UNISON would highlight the need for comprehensive and positive citizenship education in schools and colleges, and the potential this can offer to encourage early civil engagement.


  It is not unreasonable to assume that some of the culture of the House of Commons, which is old fashioned and perceived as aggressive, may make some members of groups who have been historically excluded from the institution feel that it is not a place for them. There is a common perception that national politics maintains a long-hours culture and is not family-friendly.


  Despite these issues the main political parties will have people from under represented groups who want to become MPs, should they receive the support to do so. As a result of positive action, mentoring and other measures undertaken by the Labour Party the 2005 parliamentary intake was more representative than Parliament as a whole, but the pace of change is slow.


  More can still be done to make sure that members of under represented groups are selected to stand for Parliament. Research from the Fawcett Society has demonstrated that sex discrimination plays a major role in selection processes. A number of leading Black politicians, along with UNISON, are calling for all Black shortlists as a solution to similar issues faced by black people in selections. This could in part challenge the current situation whereby those potential candidates with "foreign" names do not even make the early selection stages.


  There is no convincing evidence that, once selected, members of any under-represented group are less likely to get elected.


What are the problems and practical difficulties encountered—at any point in the process of selection and election—by members of these underrepresented groups who are looking to become MPs?


  One practical barrier is financial—fighting a selection contest within a major political party is time consuming and expensive, and being a candidate is also expensive, stressful and time consuming. Women especially may have family commitments that mean they choose not to take this on, and anyone without good financial backing would be less likely to take the risk of spending money with no certainty of getting elected. This has a greater impact on those from underrepresented groups because many of them, especially disabled people, women and people from ethnic minorities, are more likely to be poor.


  Another barrier is prejudice, especially based in unconscious assumptions about what an MP ought to be like. The Fawcett Society research has examples of how this occurs on the basis of gender . There is no doubt that prejudice and discrimination is also a barrier for disabled people, LGBT and Black people.


  Disabled people, depending on their disability, may face physical barriers to selections—meetings held in inaccessible rooms, the difficulties in visiting party members to ask for their support. If disabled people have services provided to them to support them in their work or home life they may find it difficult to get extra service provision—for example extra PA hours—to enable them to participate in political activities.


  Young people are likely to face specific barriers. Frequently young people are discriminated against. Members who are selecting candidates may have ideas about experience an MP should have that are not real occupational requirements and which exclude people, especially young people or those who have responsibilities that mean they have not had the time to put into developing CV's that appeal to members.


What actions could be taken by the Government to address disparities in representation?


  The Government could:


— Modernise the House of Commons, presenting a face to the world that includes the use of plain English and that minimises macho "yah boo" politics. This could include less emphasis on procedure in parliamentary debate, and a better website which makes it easier to see where a Bill is in its passage through parliament and what further stages and opportunities to influence it remain before it becomes law;

— Increase transparency around what MPs actually do and what skills are needed for the role, so that people can make informed decisions about whether it is right for them;

— Review and take positive measures to improve access to parliament by under-represented groups;

— Continue the debate around family friendly hours, ensure caring support is available;

— Ensure and promote accessibility arrangements;

— Increase opportunities for mentoring by MPs and provision of training to demystify how politics works;

— Raise awareness of the potential support available;

— Encourage greater diversity within selection processes.

  It is important to recognise that, whilst measures such as mentoring and individual financial support can be important, cultural change in political parties and public life is needed to make a structural difference, which is more important than giving individual help to a few to get them through the system. To this end good quality citizenship education in all schools is vital. It might also be useful to ask the media to co-operate in building a more effective democracy, as the brightest and best from all groups might be put off public office by a media that focuses on appearances, personalities and personal attacks.

What actions have been, or could be, taken by political parties, campaigning groups and others to address disparities in representation?

  The Labour Party's use of All Women Shortlists has been vital in increasing the number of women in Parliament, but it must be seen in the context of a range of other positive action measures that ensure that women must be office holders and representatives at every level within the party. Positive action or other measures aimed solely at the parliamentary level will not work if diversity is not built at every level of political parties and public life.

  It is yet to be seen whether the use of the A List in the Conservative Party, or other positive action measures undertaken by the other parties during the current parliamentary term have an impact.

  The financial barriers faced by candidates could be addressed by political parties. Organisations such as Emily's List already provide some financial support to women going through selection processes. Encouragement from central parties for these initiatives could make a difference to people coming through selection processes, or fighting to win seats.

  In regards to younger voters, UNISON has supported and campaigned for the voting age to be reduced to 16.

What actions have been taken elsewhere in the UK and overseas, and by whom, to address similar concerns? And

How can the success of such actions be measured?

  It is clear from the success of Rwanda and the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly in achieving strong gender representation that proportional representation makes it easier to achieve fairer representation, as more than one person can be selected to represent a given area, giving the parties the opportunity to use a range of measures to achieve gender balance. However there are drawbacks to the use of proportional representation. There has been some success in local government where the Labour Party has adopted "one in three" rules.

  In Scandinavian countries many political parties have chosen to use gender quotas, resulting in a significant number of women being elected, although the adoption of quotas came after a significant number of women had already been elected. It could be argued that the emphasis on gender equality throughout policy made quotas less important, as structural discrimination was being dealt with in a number of ways.

  Success can be measured by the number of people from under represented groups standing for and being elected to Parliament. It is important to recognise that it would be easy for a political party to artificially inflate its proportionality figures by standing member of underrepresented groups in seats that that party was unlikely to win—it is important to look at retirement seats, and examine who is selected by a party when an existing MP stands down, and actual results.

  In summary UNISON welcomes this important debate. It is clear that there is no single solution to the problem of discrimination and under representation—it is an issue which requires ongoing discussion and commitment.