The Constitution Unit Blog

Menu

Skip to content
  • Home
  • Coronavirus
  • Brexit
  • Parliament
    • House of Commons
    • House of Lords
    • All
  • Elections and referendums
    • 2019 general election
    • 2017 general election
    • EU referendum
    • 2015 general election
    • All
  • Democratic Engagement and Citizens’ Assemblies
  • Government
    • Cabinet manual
    • Coalition
    • Special advisers
    • All
  • Devolution
    • Scotland
    • Wales
    • Northern Ireland
    • England
    • All
  • Events
  • Other themes
    • Judiciary and human rights
      • All
    • Parties and politicians
    • Constitutions and constitution making
    • Freedom of information
    • Monarchy, church and state
    • International
  • Staff contributors
    • Meg Russell
    • Alan Renwick
    • Robert Hazell
    • Sam Anderson
    • Dave Busfield-Birch
    • Roberta Damiani
    • Lotte Hargrave
    • Lisa James
    • Rebecca McKee
    • Luke Moore
    • Honorary staff
      • Daniel Gover
      • Bob Morris
      • Patrick O’Brien
      • Akash Paun
      • Brian Walker
      • Alan Whysall
      • Ben Worthy
      • Ben Yong
  • Constitution Unit website
  • About the Constitution Unit
  • Copyright

Tag Archives: Centre for Democratic Engagement

Ending of the hybrid House of Commons breached fundamental democratic principles

Posted on June 8, 2020 by The Constitution Unit

Last week Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg demanded the end of ‘hybrid’ arrangements allowing MPs to participate and vote remotely during the COVID-19 crisis. In this open letter, a group of senior democracy specialists point out this breached the fundamental democratic principle of equality in decision-making, because the MPs most benefiting from remote participation (e.g. due to ‘shielding’) were excluded from the vote. They urge the Leader of the House to reinstate procedures allowing all MPs to participate fully in all Commons business.

IMG_20200608_051657

MPs queue to vote on Tuesday. Parliamentary copyright images are reproduced with the permission of parliament.

Dear Mr Rees-Mogg

We write to express our very grave concerns about the way in which the ‘hybrid’ House of Commons was suspended. As specialists in the principles and practice of democracy it is clear to us that these actions breached fundamental democratic principles.

The ‘hybrid’ arrangements, allowing for a mix of virtual and in-person participation in parliamentary proceedings were brought about by necessity, to enable the House of Commons to continue to fulfil its essential functions of scrutiny and representation during the coronavirus crisis. Parliamentary accountability is crucial at any time, but more crucial than ever when ministers have taken unprecedented emergency powers, and the broadest possible public consent for health measures, and restrictions on citizens’ usual freedoms, is needed.

At the initial stages of the crisis there were troubling suggestions that parliament might close down completely for up to five months (as reported in The Times on 5 March). Thankfully, attention soon moved on from this drastic (and fundamentally anti-democratic) suggestion, to exploring how parliament could keep working through the crisis.

Parliamentary staff have worked tirelessly to devise innovative technological solutions to allow MPs to contribute virtually, and online select committee meetings began during the Easter recess. The Speaker, and the House of Commons Commission, offered admirable leadership, with essential additional input from the Procedure Committee. At the early stages there was a clear commitment to working on a cross-party basis to ensure that the Commons could continue to function in a way which maintained essential representation and accountability, while protecting public health. The motions on 21 and 22 April to enable members to participate and vote remotely were warmly supported by opposition parties and unanimously agreed. This consultative, cross-party approach was exactly what was needed when bringing about such far-reaching changes to the functioning of our democratic process. It showed inclusivity and maximised the chances of maintaining public trust and support.

The attempt to dismantle the hybrid arrangements has, unfortunately, followed the reverse approach. Through a lack of consultation and cross-party decision-making it has sown unnecessary division. Furthermore, it has breached the fundamental democratic and parliamentary principle of equality in decision-making, excluding many MPs from the choice about how to run their own institution. It has done so to the detriment of some of those who are most vulnerable in this crisis. Continue reading →

Posted in Parliament | Tagged Anthony Zacharzewski, centre for constitutional change, Centre for Democratic Engagement, Centre for the Study of Democracy, Coronavirus, Cristina Leston-Bandeira, Democracy Unit, Democratic Society, Graham Smith, Hansard Society, House of Commons, House of Commons Commission, House of Lords, Involve, Jacob Rees-Mogg, John Garry, Karen Bradley, Leader of the Commons, meg russell, Michael Keating, MPs, Nicola McEwen, pairing, parliament, Parliamentary Constituencies Bill, parliamentary procedure, Procedure Committee, proxy voting, public bill committees, Ruth Fox, Shadow Leader of the Commons, Speaker, Speaker of the House of Commons, Tim Hughes, Valerie Vaz, virtual parliament | 7 Comments

Do parliamentary e-petitions debates enhance public engagement?

Posted on February 19, 2019 by The Constitution Unit

Cristina.Leston.Bandeira1.jpgIMG_20190218_125630Over 40,000 e-petitions have been submitted to parliament since the current system was introduced in 2015. Cristina Leston Bandeira and Viktoria Spaiser have conducted research into how the public views the consequent parliamentary discussion of issues raised in these petitions by analysing comments made by those watching the live parliamentary coverage. Their findings lead them to conclude that parliamentary debates should be adapted to be more inclusive of the original petitions’ aims.

Parliament introduced an e-petitions system in 2015 with the aim of enhancing its relationship with the public. The system has seen extraordinary levels of usage, with over 40,000 e-petitions submitted and plenty of other evidence of very considerable engagement from the public, such as petitions debates regularly being the most read debates on Hansard. The extraordinary usage is only one element of this new system, however. At the Centre for Democratic Engagement, we have been investigating it, focusing in particular on the more subtle expressions of engagement, beyond usage numbers. We have interviewed petitioners, developed participant observation, and analysed petitions data, parliamentary documentation and social media activity associated with e-petitions.

Some of this research has now started to come out, namely our latest article in Policy & Internet, where we use natural language processing, machine learning and social network analysis of Twitter data to explore what it shows about the extent of people’s engagement, the contents of Twitter e-petition conversations, who is taking part and how they interact. In this blog post we focus on how the public react to the format of the e-petitions parliamentary debates, through their comments on Twitter whilst they watch these debates. Our findings provide interesting insights into how people perceive the e-petition procedures in terms of fairness and responsiveness, suggesting that petition parliamentary debates could be more inclusive of the original petitions’ aims. Continue reading →

Posted in digital democracy, Parliament, Public Engagement and Policy Making | Tagged big data analysis, Centre for Democratic Engagement, Cristina Leston-Bandeira, democratic engagement, driven grouse shooting petition, e-petitions, parliamentary debates, petitions, Petitions Committee, petitions debates, Twitter, Viktoria Spaiser

Taking Back Control

Working Group on Unification Referendums on the Island of Ireland

Monitor 76: Democratic lockdown?

My Tweets

Enter your e-mail address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by e-mail.

Join 2,335 other followers

Unit Mailing List: Sign up to receive notifications of of our events, newsletter and publications

Mailing List

The Unit at 25: celebrating 25 achievements

Parliament and Brexit

Improving discourse during election and referendum campaigns

The Independent Commission on Referendums

Blog at WordPress.com.
Cancel