Hansard Society

Parliamentary Public Engagement - how's Westminster doing?

admin — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 12:15:00 GMT

UK Parliament compares well with legislatures around the world but can still learn from good practice elsewhere

A new report from the Hansard Society, Parliaments and Public Engagement: Innovation and Good Practice from Around the World, published today, reveals that the Westminster Parliament is one of the more innovative parliamentary institutions when it comes to engaging the public with its work but that there is still much it can learn from good practice in other countries.

Many legislatures around the world face a common problem: their public are neither knowledgeable about nor particularly satisfied with them as institutions. Yet, unless the public are informed about what parliaments are doing they cannot influence the institution; and unless they can influence the institution they cannot hold it and their elected members fully to account. Over the course of the last decade parliaments have had to grapple with the broad political challenges this problem poses, and in an effort to do so, public engagement programmes have become core business for many legislatures.

Parliaments and Public Engagement highlights examples of innovative and potentially transferable good practice in this fast developing field of parliamentary activity, setting out a broad menu of ideas designed to help parliaments consider what options might be the ‘best fit' for their own public engagement goals. The areas the report primarily focuses on are:

Information provision: for example, education and training materials, website presence
Parliament as public space: visitor facilities, access tours and exhibitions
Education: activities and initiatives on- and off-site for teachers, students, and the wider community
Outreach: civil society links, community partnerships and social inclusion programmes to engage with hard to reach groups
Facilitation: support platforms for parliamentarians and/or officials to engage with the public, particularly through e-forums or other online, digital democracy mechanisms
Media: initiatives with print media, broadcasting and new media platforms - both promotional and partnership work.

The report finds that each parliament grapples with many of the same difficulties: how to draw the line between political and parliamentary activity; how to balance the needs of political representatives with those of administrative officials whilst retaining the support of the former as the primary ‘face' of the institution in the public mind; how to develop an ‘ambassadorial' capacity; how to reach out beyond the ‘usual suspects' to engage with a broad range of individuals and organisations; how to go beyond traditional media outlets in communicating the best work of the parliament; and how, in the face of enormous market competition, to make best use of limited resources.

Parliaments and Public Engagement finds that initiatives which represent a major step change in public engagement practice are often the result of the parliament finding that it needs to respond to a crisis; it must react to a significant political shift in the country; or it seeks to take advantage of a milestone, such as the anniversary of the founding of the institution. These three factors - ‘windows of opportunity' - often lead to reviews of established practices and greater innovation as a consequence.

A ‘blank slate' approach as a new parliamentary institution is established (as for example, in Scotland and Wales as a result of devolution), or the appointment of new officials or a new group within the parliament, can also lead to a more proactive and innovative approach in this area of activity.

Dr Ruth Fox, Director of Research at the Hansard Society, commented:

‘Public engagement is now core business for most parliaments. Westminster is one of the parliamentary leaders in this area but there is a rich variety of ideas, initiatives and good practice emerging from institutions across the globe which could be used at Westminster and in other parliaments to add value to their existing work. They don't all cost a lot of money - indeed, some are important sources of income generation. We hope this report will act as a useful resource that parliaments can consult in order to learn about new ideas and innovations in public engagement that are being tried and tested in other places.'

For further information, contact Virginia Gibbons, Head of Communications at the Hansard Society on 0207 438 1225 or comms@hansardsociety.org.uk

Editors' Notes

The Hansard Society is the UK's leading independent, non-partisan political research and education charity (www.hansardsociety.org.uk)
Parliaments and Public Engagement: Innovation and Good Practice from Around the World explores the public engagement work of over 50 parliaments encompassing a broad and representative range of political systems, geographical regions and developed and developing democracies.
The report highlights eConsultations, outreach Bill workshops and ‘Train the Trainer' programmes, the ‘MP for a week' and ‘MyUK' on-line educational games, and the Peers in Schools and Speaker's School Council Awards Scheme as among the Westminster Parliament's most innovative initiatives from which other legislatures might learn.
The report also provides international good practice examples from which Westminster and other parliaments might learn, including: a range of thematic tours and visits in the German Bundestag and on Canada's Parliament Hill; open days and night sittings in Switzerland, the Parliament of New South Wales and the Estonian Riiggikogu; the Capitol Hill visitor centre in the USA; online forums in the Chilean Senate; and educational programmes such as the Norwegian ‘Mini Ting' and the Danish ‘Politician for a day'.
The research was supported by the Group on Information for the Public, UK Parliament.
The author of this report, Dr Ruth Fox, will be giving evidence to the House of Commons Administration Committee's inquiry into visitor services on Monday 30 January at 5:15pm in Committee Room 16.

Should Lobbying Be Transparent?

admin — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 15:15:00 GMT

18:30, Wednesday 29 February
Attlee Suite, Portcullis House, Westminster

Opening address

Mark Harper MP – Minister for Political and Constitutional Reform

Panellists

John Cryer MP
Sir Stuart Etherington – Chief Executive, NCVO
Frank Furedi – sociologist and commentator
Helen Johnson – Chair, Association of Professional Political Consultants
Jane Wilson – Chief Executive, Chartered Institute of Public Relations
Tamasin Cave – Spinwatch

To sign up for this event, Please Click Here

Event supported by Ellwood & Atfield

Representation of women in politics

admin — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:02:00 GMT

This month marks two years since the Speaker's Conference on Parliamentary Representation published its report and to date little progress has been made in implementing its findings.

Today, the report will finally be discussed by MPs after the Backbench Business Committee scheduled a debate on parliamentary representation on a motion proposed by Dame Anne Begg MP (who was the vice-chair of the Speaker’s Conference).

The Hansard Society has updated our Women at the Top briefing paper setting out some of the latest statistics about the representation of women in politics and public life in the UK today.

For further information, contact Dr Ruth Fox, Director of the Hansard Society’s Parliament and Government programme at ruth.fox@hansardsociety.org.uk

Vacancies

admin — Thu, 15 Dec 2011 13:11:00 GMT

Chair to the Board of Trustees

The Hansard Society is the UK’s leading independent, non-partisan political research and education charity. We aim to strengthen parliamentary democracy and encourage greater public involvement in politics. Our work encompasses a broad range of areas, from citizenship education to the role of Parliament, from devolution to the impact of new media on politics. Our Research and Education Programmes have genuinely made a difference to the democratic processes in the UK and beyond.

After five years, the Rt Hon Peter Riddell is stepping down and the Hansard Society is currently recruiting a new Chair to the Board of Trustees. We are seeking an inspiring, progressive and committed individual to lead our Board of Trustees. We would like to hear from you if, like the Society, you believe that civic society is most effective when its citizens are connected with the individuals and institutions who represent them in the democratic process. The Society is managed by a Chief Executive and five Directors and is currently governed by a Board of nine volunteer Trustees.

If you are interested in participating in the governance of the Hansard Society, please click here to download the application pack.

The deadline for applications is Friday, 10 February at 5pm. If you would like an informal and confidential discussion about the Society and its governance please contact Fiona Booth, CEO on 020 7438 1222.

Scholars, Communications & Events Intern (3 - 6 months)

Are you interested in politics? Are you organised and enthusiastic? Are you a good communicator? If this is you, and you're looking for 3 to 6 month internship, we'd like to hear from you.

The Hansard Society is the UK's leading independent non-partisan, political research and education charity. Our aim is simple: to promote democracy, strengthen Parliament, and in so doing, expand political engagement. To help us achieve this we are looking for an intern to join our communications and Scholars teams, to support us with our events, communications and media monitoring, as well as our undergraduate and postgraduate political education programmes.

Applicants should have strong written and oral communications skills; excellent administrative skills and close attention to detail; good level of IT literacy (esp. MS Office, web content management, social media campaigns and general internet nous).

Experience of events and communications would be a distinct advantage, as would an interest in British politics. Based in our London office on Chancery Lane, it will offer you the opportunity to demonstrate your skills and experiences in a professional environment.

Travel expenses (within London zones 1-6) and a daily lunch allowance of £5 will be available.

Key tasks:
• supporting the Communications team with event management and event publicity
• assisting the Scholars team with the organisation of the Hansard Scholars and Research Scholars Programmes.
• maintaining a presence on the Hansard Society Facebook and Twitter profiles, and maximising other online/ social media.
• supporting the Communication team with the monthly newsletter and other external communication
• updating the website
• putting together the daily media monitor
• assisting with creating promotional material for both programmes

Applicants must:
• be educated to degree level (desirable)
• have some event management experience (desirable)
• experience of using Social Media and other online tools
• be a good independent worker with excellent organisational skills and ability to work unsupervised (essential)
• have excellent written and verbal communication skills (essential)
• have a good understanding of Microsoft Office programmes (essential)

Closing Date: 7 February, 2012
Interview/Start Dates: w/c 13 February

If you would like to apply for this position, please send us a copy of your CV together with a covering letter (no more than one page) outlining why you are interested in the role and what you can bring to it, bearing in mind the skills and tasks listed above, to Luke Boga Mitchell at events@hansardsociety.org.uk.

Celebrities deserve privacy, say young people - December 15

admin — Thu, 15 Dec 2011 13:02:00 GMT

www.headsup.org.uk

Young people taking part in the HeadsUp forum - The Media...is it doing its job? felt that excessive media intrusion into the private lives of celebrities was unacceptable, particularly when it involved their children and families.

The debate - The Media...is it doing its job? - ran from November 21 to December 9, 2011. This was particularly opportune timing as the Leveson Inquiry was taking evidence throughout this period from celebrities familiar to young people such as JK Rowling and Charlotte Church. Many11-18 year-olds taking part in the HeadsUp forum expressed their support for celebrities who want to protect their privacy:

‘Celebrities should be able to keep their private photos a secret. They can't enjoy a day at the beach without the press watching their every move'

But some took the view that media interest in the lives of celebrities was acceptable to a degree and that most people who were celebrities knew this before they became famous:

‘Even though I do think that celebrities do deserve some freedom, the reason they are famous is because of the media and because everyone is interested in their lives'

The Media...is it doing its job? examined a variety of topics covering press intrusion, the media portrayal of young people and the reliability of information found online. The participants discussed whether the media should focus on serious news, entertainment or both and were particularly concerned about the negative portrayal of young people in the media:

‘I do think that sometimes TV makes all teenagers sound mopey, moany and stroppy and often rude and sometimes stupid or thick. This mainly because they feel that it will get better viewing because everyone ‘loves' watching a bunch of teens moan about their own issues''

‘Newspapers and TV constantly brand young people as binge drinking, drug taking, fire starting, pregnant at 16, violence causing nuisances. However this is clearly untrue... isn't it unfair that the media is constantly stereotyping ALL young people in these negative ways. Using a previous example of the August Riots, almost 90% of headlines mentioned teenagers as the sole cause, or almost sole cause, of the violence. But did you know that only 19% of arrests made and sentences given were to young people aged 11-18? Teenagers were unfairly blamed for the rioting and destruction when the majority of the crimes where actually committed by older people.''

Overall, the young people taking part understood many of the areas of concern that adults often have about young people and the internet. They were very clear about checking the reliability of information on the net and understood the importance of privacy of personal information, but many suggested that some elements of the law relating to the internet were still confusing:

‘I think the law should be more clear, as many people don't know what is illegal and legal'

For further information, contact Beccy Allen at the Hansard Society on 020 7438 1214 or at beccy@hansardsociety.org.uk

Editors' Notes

All quotes come direct from the forum and are unedited. Fifty seven young people took part in the debate; there were 4,924 visits to the website, with 187 comments.
The full forum report for ‘The Media...is it doing its job?' can be downloaded here.
HeadsUp is an online debating space for 11-18 year-olds, run by the independent and non-partisan Hansard Society, to enable young people to discuss their views on political issues with their peers and influential decision-makers. It aims to build levels of political awareness and participation so that young people can play an effective role in the democratic processes affecting their lives. HeadsUp is also a space that politicians and political parties can use to consult with young people and find out their ideas, experiences and opinions.
HeadsUp was runner up in the Empowering Young People and Citizens category at the 2010 Nominet Internet Awards - recognising best practice use of the internet.
Two ways to register to take part in HeadsUp:

Young People - If you are 11-18 and want to get in on the action you need to complete the Student Sign Up Form.
Teachers/youth workers - can register a whole class/school year/group by completing our Teachers Registration Form

The project is part-funded by the House of Commons.
There are currently over 1000 schools and youth organisations registered on HeadsUp.
The decision-makers supporting the forum were:

o Philip Davies MP - Member of the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee;

o John Hemming MP - Chair of the All-Party New Media Group;

o Jo Swinson MP - former Liberal Democrat Spokesperson for Culture, Media and Sport and Vice-Chair of the All-Party Media Literacy Group;

o John Thurso MP - former member of the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee;

o Baroness Morris - former Minister of State, Department of Culture, Media and Sport;

o Viscount Falkland - former Spokesperson for Culture, Media and Sport;

o Carolyn Quinn - BBC journalist and Chair of the Parliamentary Press Gallery;

o Daniel Booth - Editor, Web User magazine;

o Susanna Giner - Youth Media Agency.

Dr. Ruth Fox writes in The Huffington Post about Europe

admin — Thu, 15 Dec 2011 12:21:00 GMT

Dr. Ruth Fox, the Hansard Society's Director of the Parliament and Government Programme has written a piece for The Huffington Post about Europe. It is titled: Europe: Adding a Democratic Crisis to an Economic One? Dr. Fox wrote,

"Britain may have wielded its first ever veto in defence of the financial institutions in the City of London last week but an even bigger national, indeed universal interest, was also at stake: the very concept of parliamentary democracy itself."

To read more please click here.

The Media: is it doing its job? - November 15

admin — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 16:10:00 GMT

11-18 year-olds to have their say on press freedom,

the recent hacking scandal and the effects of digital media

21 November - 9 December 2011

HeadsUp.org.uk

HeadsUp is an online forum for young people to explore political issues and learn about politics through debate with their peers and politicians. HeadsUp provides a direct line to politicians, allowing students to get their views across to real decision-makers and is a safe, moderated space that can be used by teachers as a resource for the teaching of Citizenship or PSHE.

All the debates are supported by lesson plans and activities for teachers and background information for students to ensure high-quality and informed debate.

The three week debate is happening online from Monday 21 November to Friday 9 December 2011 and all of the comments can be viewed throughout the three weeks without registration. The following topics will be discussed:

o Press Freedom: Should we ever be able to tell the media that they can't publish information in a democracy? Should celebrities be able to use the courts to keep embarrassing stories out of the press?

o The Role of the Media: Does the media have a duty to provide us with high quality information? Do you think that the media is good at checking what the government is up to? Is the focus on celebrity culture a problem?

o New Media: How do you know which information to trust? Does the internet give ordinary people more power? Should the government be able to shut down social networks if they think they are being used to break the law?

o Young People: Do you think that the media treats young people fairly? Does the news pay enough attention to young people and their concerns? Should the media include more young people in its news reporting?

The following decision-makers are getting involved, with more to be confirmed soon:

Philip Davies MP - member of the select committee for Culture, Media and Sport
Viscount Falkland - former member of the Culture, Media and Sport committee
Baroness Estelle Morris - former Minister in the Department of Culture, Media and Sport
John Thurso MP - former member of the Culture, Media and Sport committee

Philip Davies MP said in his supporting statement for the forum:

"As a member of the Culture, Media and Sports Select Committee since 2005, I have examined the workings of the British press, restrictions on the media and more recently, illegal activity in newsrooms. My starting point, as a libertarian, is that a free press is an essential part of a free society. Despite the phone-hacking scandal, the British press is a dynamic and vibrant industry that exposes wrongdoing and holds people to account."

For more information contact Beccy Allen at the Hansard Society on 0207 438 1214 or beccy@hansardsociety.org.uk

Editors' Notes

HeadsUp (http://www.headsup.org.uk/) is an innovative website where 11-18 year olds debate political issues and learn about the political process. The site is a non-partisan, cross-party educational resource that provides a secure, structured and student-centred discussion platform.
The forum schedule for the 2011-12 school year is as follows:

§ 26 September - 14 October 2011 :: How equal is Britain? [report now available]

§ 21 November - 9 December 2011 :: The Media...

§ 5 - 23 March 2012 :: Families...

§ 30 April - 18 May 2012 :: You and society...

§ 18 June - 6 July 2012 :: Olympic and Paralympic Games...

Interested MPs, Peers, MSPs and AMs are invited to get involved in the debate - to take part please email Beccy Allen (above) for more information.
Two ways to register to participate in HeadsUp:

Young People - If you are aged 11-18 and want to get in on the action you need to complete the Student Sign Up Form.
Teachers/youth workers - can register a whole class/school year/group by completing our Teachers Registration Form.

All HeadsUp forums are open to be viewed and the debate followed by the public. Participants need to register or login to post comments (11-18s and supporting teachers/youth workers only).
The project is part-funded by the House of Commons.
There are over 1,000 schools currently registered with HeadsUp.

Hansard Society eNewsletter

admin — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 15:20:00 GMT

The Hansard Society has an eNewsletter sent out to members every month. The eNewsletter informs members of upcoming events and projects that the Society is working on. If you are not already a member but would like to subscribe to our monthly eNewsletter then Please Click Here.

If you would like to view October's eNewsletter, Please Click Here.

Hansard Scholars Programme (Undergraduates)

admin — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 12:00:00 GMT

Are you an undergraduate interested in politics and current affairs? Would you enjoy studying and interning in the UK, at the heart of the parliamentary process, alongside key decision-makers and opinion-formers from Parliament, Government, campaign organisations, think tanks, lobbying groups, and the media? Would you enjoy a semester living in one of the most vibrant, exciting, and politically important cities in the world?

As a Hansard Scholar, you will be part of an organisation with an unparalleled reputation in the political world, developed over more than 60 years. You will study British politics, have seminars with politicians and undertake an internship with an organisation which corresponds with your research interests and ambitions – be it with an NGO, a government department, a lobbying group or in the Houses of Parliament themselves!

The Hansard Scholars Programme is a 12-week (11 weeks in summer), full-time course (split equally between study and internship) which offers an outstanding opportunity for international students to gain academic and practical knowledge of the British political system and current debates in UK public policy.

Please follow the below links for further details.

The Hansard Society is registered with the UK Government's Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (BIS) as an education & training provider, and is accredited by the British Accreditation Council.

Parliamentary Affairs

admin — Fri, 04 Nov 2011 11:05:00 GMT

Essential reading for anyone interested in contemporary politics

Discounted rate for Hansard Society members

The latest issue of Parliamentary Affairs (October 2011) contains a variety of articles including an examination of women in Irish politics, an analysis of the Wright Committee reforms and an analysis of the SNP's draft constitution for Scotland.

As well as abstracts from the articles Parliamentary Affairs podcasts are also available. These are interviews with the authors designed to explore themes from their work. The podcasts are between 10 and 15 minutes long, and designed to inform researchers and to serve as teaching tools to stimulate discussion amongst students.

Parliamentary Affairs is a long-established quarterly journal published by Oxford University Press in association with the Hansard Society. Individual subscriptions to Parliamentary Affairs cost £62 a year but if you become a member of the Hansard Society for £60 a year, included within this cost is a special reduced subscription to Parliamentary Affairs for just £25 a year.

Become a member of the Hansard Society (£60 a year) and receive a reduced subscription rate to Parliamentary Affairs included within this cost.
Individual subscriptions cost £62 a year from jnls.cust.serv@oup.com or Journals Customer Service Department, Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP

Peers should use social media to connect with public, says Lord Sugar - October 31

admin — Mon, 31 Oct 2011 15:05:00 GMT

Lords of the Blog

Writing on Lords of the Blog today, Lord Sugar calls on his fellow peers to break down barriers with the public by using social media as a part of everyday political life:

‘Social media means that people can have direct access to me as a Lord and as a businessman. Individuals, campaigning groups and external organisations should be able to contact us and, on some occasions, put us on the spot in public forums for the decisions we take on their behalf......The way I use social media means there are no barriers between me and the public.

‘We should be looking at the best way to break down barriers between the House of Lords and what happens in people's everyday lives; we need to get the message across that what happens in our House actually affects what happens in their house.'

For further information about Lords of the Blog contact Virginia Gibbons at mediaprog@hansard.lse.ac.uk or 020 7438 1225

Editors Notes
·    The Hansard Society is hosting a special event as part of Parliament Week focusing on how the House of Lords engages with the public and what must be done to achieve a more connected Upper Chamber (hashtag #PeerTweet).

Parliament and the public: What difference does the Lords make?

6.30 - 8pm, Wednesday 2 November, Attlee Suite, Portcullis House

Introduction
o    Rt Hon Baroness D'Souza CMG (Lord Speaker)
Chair
o    Rt Hon Peter Riddell (Chair Hansard Society)
Panel
o    Mark Darcy (BBC)
o    Baroness Scott of Needham Market (Liberal Democrat)
o    Lord Soley (Labour)
o    Professor Baroness Young of Hornsey OBE (Crossbench)
o    Professor Lord Norton of Louth (Conservative)

To attend, email hans_admin@hansard.lse.ac.uk or phone 0207 438 1216

·    Lords of the Blog was launched by the Hansard Society in 2008 to encourage dialogue between the public and Members of the House of Lords. It is the only cross-party blog of any legislature in the world.
·    Lords of the Blog attracts an average of 5,000 comments per year.
·    There are 12 bloggers who write regular blog posts related to life and work in the House of Lords. Lord Sugar is the latest guest blogger on the site.
·    Lords of the Blog has been mentioned in 15 debates in the House of Lords and has informed the Lords Information Committee inquiry ‘Are the Lords Listening?'
·    Blogging peers regularly ask for opinions and evidence from the blog's audience to inform debates they are speaking in or questions they ask in the House.

Westminster World Heritage Site and Parliament Square a national disgrace

admin — Mon, 24 Oct 2011 19:25:00 GMT

New vision which puts citizen and visitor at its heart is needed, says new report from the Hansard Society

A new report from the Hansard Society - A Place for People – Proposals for Enhancing Visitor Engagement with Parliament’s Environs - exploring how better use can be made of the Westminster World Heritage Site and Parliament Square concludes that rather than a place of national pride this landmark area is a national disgrace.

A Place for People describes the area, which attracts over 30 million visitors a year, as unwelcoming: ‘a noisy, polluted, inaccessible place, seething with traffic and pedestrians and pockmarked by fortress-like security’. The report sets out a range of ideas for the development of a new vision for the area which puts the citizen and visitor at its heart, and which would unlock the potential of the site in ways commensurate with its international status and reputation. The report calls for a new vision to be implemented with the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta in 2015 in mind.

In the past 30 years there have been several proposals for improvements to the area but little progress has been made.* A Place for People provides recommendations to improve both physical and intellectual access to the area, including:

Improving traffic management and pedestrianising Parliament Square;
Rationalising the World Heritage Site by expanding the boundary to include Parliament Square, Victoria Tower Gardens, Abingdon Street Gardens and Canning Green;
Turning Parliament Square into a forum for both spontaneous and organised citizenship, similar in style to a Speakers’ Corner. As well as a site for protest, it should be a place for a rich and diverse programme of events, lectures and discussions managed by an independent Square Steering Group;
Improving signage and information provision throughout the World Heritage Site and neighbouring areas;
Establishing new guided walks - for example:

a new Magna Carta Walkway (to mark the 2015 anniversary) supported by maps, guidebooks, and multi-media guides;
a cultural corridor linking Trafalgar Square to Parliament Square to Tate Britain through the provision of signage, information maps, leaflets and digital applications to relate the democratic story through the mix of art, statuary and sculpture en route.

Improving access to and use of Victoria Tower Gardens, including the introduction of a ‘People’s Terrace’ facility offering visitor amenities;
Converting the Parliamentary Bookshop on Bridge Street into a Visitor Information Centre where maps, leaflets, multi-media guides as well as gifts and souvenirs can be obtained;
Converting 6/7 Old Palace Yard into an exhibition and interpretation space for Parliament supplemented by improved interpretation space at the Jewel Tower;
Converting the Queen Elizabeth II Conference Centre into a multi-stakeholder World Heritage Site Visitors’ Centre.

The current management model for the World Heritage Site clearly does not work. This report therefore also calls for a new, more collaborative approach: membership of the World Heritage Site Management Plan Steering Group should be revised and implementation of a new management plan should be overseen preferably by a new Westminster World Heritage Trust or the appointment of a co-ordinator.

Dr Ruth Fox, joint author of A Place for People and Director of the Hansard Society’s Parliament and Government programme, commented: ‘The current state of the area does not say much for our sense of national pride and civic values. Those tasked with responsibility for the area have been negligent in their stewardship. Our proposals offer a new vision which puts the citizen and visitor at the heart of the area.

The opportunity to showcase the area during next year's Olympics and Diamond Jubilee - the biggest events attracting people to the capital in a generation - has largely been wasted. But there are new opportunities ahead, particularly linked to the 2015 Magna Carta anniversary. The worst outcome of all would be for the stakeholders, as in the past, to adopt an all or nothing approach. Implementation of any of the proposals set out in this report would be an improvement on the status quo.'

For further information, contact Virginia Gibbons mediaprog@hansard.lse.ac.uk or 020 7438 1225 or 07812 765 552

Editors’ Notes

The Hansard Society is the UK's leading independent, non-partisan political research and education charity.
The research for A Place for People was supported by the Group on Information for the Public, UK Parliament.
The report’s findings are based on desk and archive research, supplemented by discussion groups, one-to-one interviews and consultations with key stakeholders.

* Previous reports include:

1970 Greater London Council’s Three Square’s Project
1998 – World Squares for All Masterplan
2006 – World Squares for All - Parliament Square Regeneration: A Framework for Action

Inequality to blame for riots, say young people - October 20

admin — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 13:56:00 GMT

www.headsup.org.uk

Seventy-one per cent of 11-18 year-olds taking part in the first HeadsUp forum of the new school year, How equal is Britain? thought that inequality was either mostly or partly to blame for the riots in English cities this year.

The How equal is Britain? debate, running from September 26 - October 14, attracted a record number of comments from young people. The forum covered a variety of issues ranging from the role of inequality in the recent riots to equal representation in Parliament and sexism in sport. You can read the full report of the debate here.

Opinion was divided on the reasons for the riots:

"I believe that the people who got involved in the riots had a reason. Maybe it was because the government were not really taking care of them. They have got nothing left, so they have got nothing to lose."

"I don't think there was a message behind the riots because it could have started for a reason but most people that were involved with it were doing it for the excitement and money that looting provides."

Those taking part in the forum were asked if inequality played a part in the riots:
·   31% thought inequality was mostly to blame
·   40% thought that inequality was partly to blame
·   16% thought people involved were responsible for their own actions
·   13% were not sure what caused the riots

Equal representation of women in Parliament also attracted a lot of posts, with many agreeing with Green Party leader Caroline Lucas MP, who took part in the debate:

"Over half the population is female, yet we have a situation in which the important decisions about the future of the country are taken by men."

There was some debate as to how this might best be achieved, with some students supportive of fairer gender representation but stopping short of endorsing quotas:

"People should be chosen to become MPs based on how well they will be able to do their job, not on their gender, sexuality or race."

There was also extensive discussion of women in sport. Posters felt that women had fewer sporting opportunities than men, owing to limited TV coverage, stereotypes about specific sports for each gender and poor P.E. lessons at school:

"When I was younger I was put off sport, because I never saw female players, which made me think that women weren't allowed to participate. It totally put me off sport and I never tried because I didn't think it would be a job possibility."

For further information, contact Beccy Allen at the Hansard Society on 020 7438 1214 or at beccy@hansardsociety.org.uk

Editors' Notes
o   All quotes come direct from the forum and are unedited. Over 100 young people took part in the debate; there were 4,254 visits to the website, with 1,169 posts.
o   The full forum report for How equal is Britain? can be downloaded here.
o   HeadsUp (http://www.headsup.org.uk/content/) is an online debating space for 11-18 year-olds, run by the independent and non-partisan Hansard Society, to enable young people to discuss their views on political issues with their peers and influential decision-makers.

It aims to build levels of political awareness and participation so that young people can play an effective role in the democratic processes affecting their lives.

HeadsUp is also a space that politicians and political parties can use to consult with young people and find out their ideas, experiences and opinions.
o   HeadsUp was runner up in the Empowering Young People and Citizens category at the 2010 Nominet Internet Awards - recognising best practice use of the internet.
o   Two ways to register to take part in HeadsUp:
·   Young People - If you are 11-18 and want to get in on the action you need to complete the Student Sign Up Form.
·   Teachers/youth workers - can register a whole class/school year/group by completing our Teachers Registration Form
o   The project is part-funded by the House of Commons.
o   There are currently over 1000 schools and youth organisations registered on HeadsUp.
o   The decision-makers supporting the forum were:
·   Angela Burns AM - Conservative Shadow Minister for Education;
·   Christine Chapman AM - Member, Children and Young People Committee;
·   Caroline Lucas MP - Leader of the Green Party;
·   Siobhan McMahon MSP - Member, Equal Opportunities Committee;
·   Ian Mearns MP - Member, Education Committee;
·   Baroness Estelle Morris - former Minister for Education;
·   Meg Munn MP - Vice-Chair, All-Party Parliamentary Group on Women and Enterprise;
·   Jenny Rathbone AM - Member, Children and Young People Committee;
·   Tim Woodhouse - Women's Sport and Fitness Foundation.

Apply for the Summer & Autumn 2012 Hansard Scholars Programmes!

admin — Thu, 29 Sep 2011 11:05:00 GMT

If you are interested in taking part in a unique programme, studying and experiencing British politics from the inside, you can now apply for the

Summer and Autumn 2012 Hansard Scholars Programmes (undergraduates)

(N.B. The postgraduate Hansard Research Scholars Programme will not run during the Summer term)

The Hansard Scholars Programmes offer an outstanding opportunity for undergraduates, postgraduates and professionals to gain invaluable experience at the heart of the British political system.

As you will no doubt be aware, the Hansard Scholars Programme offers international students unique and prestigious opportunities. Not only will you be undertaking an internship placement right at the heart of British politics, but your courses and research will provide you with invaluable knowledge and understanding of the world in which you will find yourself immersed.

Throughout the Programme, you will also hear up-to-the-minute presentations from eminent figures within the British political system – from former Cabinet Ministers to prominent political journalists and academics. In addition, political study visits to Edinburgh and Oxford will give you a wider view of political culture beyond Westminster and London.

The Spring term will be a particularly fascinating time in which to immerse yourself in British politics, as the new coalition government will be nearing its second year in year in office and the implementation of new policies and proposed structural changes to the political system will be well under way. Your internship, whether in the Westminster offices of an MP or research department of an NGO or consultancy, will therefore allow you to experience this historic era in British politics from its epicentre.

Study abroad is without doubt an experience that will broaden your outlook as well as your horizons. The Hansard Scholars Programme will provide you with a challenging, rewarding, and memorable semester, in addition to the unrivalled cultural experience of living and working in a foreign country.

Please click here for Programme dates

The Hansard Scholars Programme is a highly competitive programme for undergraduates, postgraduates and professionals. Each semester we are forced to decline a number of very good candidates and it is therefore crucial that you provide us with as much positive information about your interests and experience as possible to support your application.

Click here for further details (incl. application form) about the undergraduate Hansard Scholars Programme

Click here for further details (incl. application form) about the Hansard Research Scholars Programme

Application Procedure

The following pieces of documentation should be submitted in English:

Application form - download here: Undergraduates / Researchers
A short personal statement outlining reasons for applying
A CV / Résumé. This must also be submitted by e-mail
A sample of written academic work (approx. 2,000 words)
Two letters of recommendation (at least one academic)*
Copy of your university transcript**
Applicants from non-English speaking countries must provide the results of a TOEFL test (or equivalent)

* Letters of recommendation sent via email must come directly from the email address of your referee.
** An official hard copy of your university transcript must be sent via post to the above address.

All applications should be sent to:

Hansard Scholars Programme
Hansard Society
40-43 Chancery Lane
London WC2A 1JA
United Kingdom

Or emailed to:

scholars@hansardsociety.org.uk

We look forward to hearing from you!

If you have any questions about the Hansard Scholars Programme, please email
scholars@hansardsociety.org.uk or call +44 207 438 1223.

Building on success - why we need to review the select committee system

admin — Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:13:00 GMT

This article was originally posted on the LSE Politics and Policy blog.

Select committees are one of the great success stories of Parliament. Over the last 30 years they have become the principal mechanism through which the House of Commons holds the executive to account and have influenced the direction of government policy and legislation. Reforms in the past decade have increased their status and sharpened their operation, particularly the recent change to elect committee chairs and members, and events such as the banking crisis and the phone hacking scandal have given committees and their work a higher profile than ever before.

However these successes mask underlying questions about the functioning of the select committee system. Many new demands have been placed on committees in recent years, their workload is increasing and public expectation of them has been heightened, and yet resources are finite and will come under increasing pressure in the future as a result of budget cuts.

The workload of committees

Committees have a set of 10 core tasks, set out in 2002 (following a recommendation of the Hansard Society’s Scrutiny Commission), to guide their work. These include examining government policy proposals (white papers, green papers etc.), departmental decisions and outputs, pre-legislative scrutiny of draft bills, scrutiny of the implementation of policy and legislation (post-legislative scrutiny), departmental expenditure, the workings of Executive Agencies, Non-Departmental Public Bodies (NDPBs) and regulators, and major appointments made by the department.

The sum total of these tasks, for even a medium-sized government department, represents a huge workload for a committee of 11 MPs (and four or five staff). And while no committee can be expected to cover everything during the course of a parliamentary session, there are concerns that an impending increase in the weight of work is going to stretch their ability to cover even a sensible, representative fraction of it.

The new or expanding areas of work cover a variety of the core tasks, the most high profile being an increase in pre-appointment hearings for appointees to senior public offices. These were introduced in 2008 on a pilot basis, and after more than 30 hearings in three years, are here to stay. The Treasury Committee last year secured the right to veto the Chancellor’s appointment, and crucially also dismissal, of the head of the new Office of Budget Responsibility, and the Liaison Committee has recently set out a list of just over 60 posts that it believes select committees should hold veto-enhanced pre-appointment hearings for (while leaving to the committees’ discretion whether to hold hearings for the many other lesser posts).

Committees are also likely to be burdened with more pre-legislative scrutiny as the government embarks on its second legislative programme from May next year. Ministers in both Houses have repeatedly stated their intention to bring forward more draft bills in subsequent sessions, and while similar undertakings were made and not realised under the previous administration, an increase in the number of draft bills is likely and will put significant pressure on committee time and resources.

Another reform that potentially brings with it extra work is the new system for post-legislative scrutiny. In 2008 the government committed to publishing a review of every Act of Parliament (other than financial measures) between three to five years of Royal Assent to assess their impact, with the intention being that select committees would analyse these reviews and undertake their own investigation if required. This was backdated to start with Acts passed in 2005, so only recently have these reviews started to be published in any number for select committees to consider.

A number of other reforms also have significant workload implications; improved financial reporting by government departments will heighten expectations that committees undertake detailed scrutiny of public spending, especially during a time of economic uncertainty and austerity measures, while the 2008 Planning Act requires committees to scrutinise proposals for National Policy Statements on planning.

The expansion of the role and function of select committees in this way, and the extra demands and opportunities that arise as a result raises questions about the extent to which committees are in command of their own agenda. There is a danger that the very success of committees makes them the default option for all additional parliamentary activity that arises and that government may have too much influence upon them by adding new tasks to their workload. The increasing demands on select committees and their members have been explicitly referred to in the last 18 months both by the Reform Committee and the Liaison Committee, with both recommending that a review of the core tasks is needed. It is now essential that this takes place.

Reviewing the select committee system

A review must balance the case for a more prescriptive approach with the clear predisposition of committees to retain their ability to set their own agenda. While the current formulation of core tasks has helped move select committees towards a more systematic form of scrutiny, any attempt to expand them would bring the system up against both its own limited resources and in conflict with the members who perform these roles.

Greater definition of the core tasks is therefore essential for committees to plan their work more effectively over the course of a parliament, ensuring that they are making the best choices possible about what policy areas and bodies to scrutinise, and providing some form of accountability and transparency for those choices. For example, scrutiny of the work and expenditure of ‘executive agencies, NDPBs, regulators and other associated public bodies’ referenced in Tasks 5 and 7, and ‘major appointments’ in Task 8 leave it entirely open to each departmental committee to decide which bodies and appointments it will focus on. As a consequence some bodies and appointments attract more attention than others, and large areas of departmental operations go unscrutinised.

The review should also examine how committees follow-up their work. The current model encourages committees to undertake inquiries, hold hearings and produce reports, but then often leave the subject entirely and move on to other things. Committees should seek to maintain a watching brief on areas they have scrutinised, examining whether their recommendations have been implemented, and calling ministers to fresh evidence sessions to account for progress.

This should go alongside some self-examination by committees. They should review the inquiries they have undertaken and recommendations made, and reflect upon their coverage of the core tasks over a parliament. Committees in Scotland produce legacy reports at the end each parliament that perform this function, setting out the areas they have covered, the progress made, and a possible roadmap of future work for their successors. Committees in Westminster should look to maximise the value of such a system both for self-evaluation and improvement and also the cementing of institutional memory.

The review should also consider whether cross-cutting policy committees, involving members and resources from a number of committees, would be beneficial to tackle cross-departmental issues (such as government policy on young people). There is the potential for committees to take a more innovative approach to the use of their resources and the harnessing of external support.

The select committee system is more effective than it has ever been. But to maintain their development, and avoid being bogged down under the weight of increasing workload and expectations, a thorough review of their core tasks and resources is needed for them to continue to develop and prosper in the future.

Matt Korris.

This article is heavily adapted from ‘Reviewing Select Committee Tasks and Modes of Operation’ by Alex Brazier and Ruth Fox in the Hansard Society’s journal Parliamentary Affairs.

An audio recording of a recent Hansard Society event entitled ‘Select Committees: Are they as effective as they think they are’ is available here.

How equal is Britain? September 22, 2011

admin — Thu, 22 Sep 2011 13:49:00 GMT

11-18 year-olds to discuss the recent riots, and equality

of opportunity in education, sport and youth employment

26 September - 14 October 2011

HeadsUp.org.uk

HeadsUp is an online forum for young people to explore political issues and learn about politics through debate with their peers and politicians. HeadsUp provides a direct line to politicians, allowing students to get their views across to real decision-makers, and talk about the political issues that are important to them.

The first debate of the school term will be ‘How equal is Britain?' and is supported by comprehensive BackUp information for students and Teachers' notes to help plan lessons around the debate topic.

The three-week debate is happening online from Monday 26 September to Friday 14 October 2011 and all of the comments by the legislators and forum users can be viewed throughout the three weeks without registration. The following decision-makers are getting involved, with more to be confirmed soon:

Caroline Lucas, Leader of the Green Party
Siobahn McMahon MSP, Member of the Equal Opportunities Committee
Ian Mearns MP, Member of the Education Committee;
Baroness Morris, Former Secretary of State for Education.

The following topics will be discussed:

How equal is Britain? Is Britain divided? Were the riots in London, Birmingham and Manchester a reaction to inequality in our society? How can we make sure that Parliament is more representative of British society? How can the gender pay gap be closed? Does the British monarchy need reform?
Young people - Have you ever experienced age discrimination? Should there be a younger voting age? Do you know your rights? Are young people more affected by government cuts than other groups in society?
Education - Are school dress codes fair? Does everyone have an equal chance in our education system? Do schools do enough to include students with special education needs and disabilities? How well does your school tackle issues such as bullying and racism?
Sport - Are sports still sexist? Should men and women compete in the same sports together? Can women's sports ever reach the same status as men's? Do you think mixed sports teams at schools are a good idea?

Caroline Lucas MP commented:

"If we are to make our democracy stronger and improve the political system for future generations, it's crucial to ensure that the views of young people are fully heard and understood. So I warmly welcome this HeadsUp online debate on what is perhaps the most fundamental issue of our time: inequality."

Baroness Morris commented:

"It's difficult to find a time in history or a country in the world that hasn't relied on education in a quest to bring about greater equality. That's why, in any debate about equality in Britain, the performance of the education system must come under scrutiny."

For more information contact Beccy Allen at the Hansard Society on 0207 438 1214 or r.allen@hansard.lse.ac.uk

Editors' Notes

HeadsUp (http://www.headsup.org.uk/) is an innovative website where 11-18 year olds debate political issues and learn about the political process. The site is a non-partisan, cross-party educational resource that provides a secure, structured and student-centred discussion platform.
The forum schedule for the 2011-12 school year is as follows:

§ 26 September - 14 October 2011 :: How equal is Britain?

§ 21 November - 9 December 2011 :: The Media...

§ 5 - 23 March 2012 :: Families...

§ 30 April - 18 May 2012 :: You and society...

§ 18 June - 6 July 2012 :: Olympic and Paralympic Games...

Interested MPs, Peers, MSPs, AMs and MEPs are invited to get involved in the debate - to take part please email Beccy Allen (above) for more information.
Two ways to register to participate in HeadsUp:

Young People - If you are aged 11-18 and want to get in on the action you need to complete the Student Sign Up Form.
Teachers/youth workers - can register a whole class/school year/group by completing our Teachers Registration Form.

All HeadsUp forums are open to be viewed and the debate followed by the public. Participants need to register or login to post comments (11-18s and supporting teachers/youth workers only).
The project is part-funded by the House of Commons.
There are over 1,000 schools currently registered with HeadsUp.

Connecting Citizens to Parliament

admin — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 11:41:00 GMT

Connecting Citizens to Parliament explores which communities and social groups are not engaging with Parliament, why and how this might be redressed. It concludes that connecting with ‘hard to reach' groups cannot be achieved by a sudden radical change of approach, but demands a number of smaller cumulative step-changes, many of which Parliament can initiate or suggest but cannot necessarily lead.

The Connecting Citizens to Parliament research is based on a quantitative survey of 2,005 adults and five qualitative semi-structured focus groups. It confirms that social class and age are the strongest determining factors for engagement. Barriers to engagement include:

Parliament itself because of arcane traditions and the complexity of its processes and procedures
The narrow range and overall lack of parliamentary coverage in the media
Weaknesses in the delivery of political literacy education in schools, in the community and voluntary sector
The dearth of informal learning opportunities through public libraries and social networks.

Parliament 2020: Visioning the Future Parliament

admin — Mon, 19 Sep 2011 11:18:00 GMT

Parliament 2020: Visioning the Future Parliament - international research from the Hansard Society - demonstrates that effective political literacy education and greater use of digital media are priorities to bridge the gap between elected representatives and the public.

The focus of Parliament 2020: Visioning the Future Parliament is on how parliaments can improve processes, enhance communication and better engage with citizens. The participants in the research project comprised parliamentarians, parliamentary officials and members of the public from four countries (Australia, Canada, Chile and the UK).

Beyond the headlines: Has trust in politicians really declined?

admin — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 14:38:00 GMT

The Committee on Standards in Public Life’s (CSPL) biennial survey of public attitudes towards conduct in public life has just been published, to headlines proclaiming a decline in public trust in politicians – indeed an increasing decline in the words of committee chairman Sir Christopher Kelly. But is this really the case?

The headline finding is that only 26% of the public trust in 'MPs in general'. This result shows absolutely no change from previous years (it was 27% in 2004, 29% in 2006 and 27% in 2008). This figure also exactly matches the finding for 'trust in politicians' in our Audit of Political Engagement 7 (the survey for which was conducted at the end of 2009, the year in which the expenses scandal took place) and fits with the general trend across the Audits, which have shown very little change in the levels of trust in politicians over time.

So trust in politicians in general has not changed. But there has been a marked decline in trust in ‘your local MP’ according to the CSPL survey – 40% trust their local MP now, compared to 47% in 2004, 45% in 2006 and 48% in 2008.

The question is what accounts for this decline? While it is tempting to suggest, as The Independent does, that it is a reaction to the highly publicised failings of individual MPs during the expenses scandal, there are strong arguments that it is instead a consequence of the 2010 election.

Firstly, the election led to a significant turnover in MPs, which means that many people have new MPs who they will be less familiar with. This is borne out by the Audit 8 finding that fewer people could correctly name their MP this year than at any previous time the question has been asked. Given that familiarity tends to go hand-in-hand with favourability, the reduced trust in 'your local MP' may simply be a product of fewer people knowing who their MP is.

Secondly, the impact of two parties in coalition may have damaged trust, particularly among Liberal Democrat supporters (and potentially Conservatives as well), for whom high profile policy u-turns on the economy and tuition fees may well have reduced their faith if they have a local Lib Dem MP.

Disappointingly the CSPL has not published the raw survey data along with the report, so it is currently not possible to tell, for example, whether there were a large proportion of people answering ‘Don’t Know’ to this question about trust in their local MP,* or to cross-check factors like party support or party of a respondents MP against the trust measure.

If the election and coalition are the root cause of this change, then there can be some cause for optimism that the situation will improve of its own account, as people become more familiar with their new MPs and with coalition government.

But even so, none of this should detract from the fact that perceptions of MPs’ behaviour certainly appear to have worsened by plenty of other measures, as the proportion of the public who agree that all or most MPs are:

‘dedicated to doing a good job for the public’: 26 per cent in 2010 (-20 points from 2008);
‘competent at their jobs’: 26 per cent (-10 points);
‘telling the truth’: 20 per cent (-6 points);
‘making sure that public money is spent wisely’: 18 per cent (-10 points);
‘in touch with what the public thinks is important’: 15 per cent (-14 points).

And yet despite this decline in the perceptions of MPs’ behaviour, this has not had any impact in the overall levels of trust. Given the consistency in that finding (from both the CSPL survey and the Audit), can we conclude that 26% is rock bottom for trust in politicians?

One other fascinating nugget from the CSPL survey is the finding that the proportion of the public who think that MPs are ‘setting a good example in their private lives’ is down to 22% (from 42% in 2004, 38% in 2006 and 36% in 2008). Does this mean that the public perceive the fiddling of expenses as something that is part of an MP’s private life, rather than misconduct in public office, or does this relate to something else entirely?

Whatever the answers, these results certainly underscore the need for greater efforts to be made to inform and engage the public with the work of MPs, and ideally for the media to be more even-handed in its coverage of politics and politicians – holding them up when they do good work, as well as holding them to account when they do not.

Matt Korris

For more on trust in politics, see What's trust got to do with it? and for more on the public's attitudes towards politics, see the Audit of Political Engagement series.

* I would not actually expect a great increase in people saying 'Don't Know' to this opinion question on trust. People tend to be willing to say 'Don't Know' to questions of fact (such as "What is the name of your MP?") but will usually give an opinion on matters whether they know anything of the facts or not!

Half the public don’t know and don’t care about Parliament - August 18 2011

admin — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 13:41:00 GMT

Connecting Citizens to Parliament - research from the Hansard Society published today - demonstrates that half the public (52%) are not really interested in Parliament and do not want to be involved in what it does.

The research explores which communities and social groups are not engaging with Parliament, why and how this might be redressed. It concludes that connecting with ‘hard to reach' groups cannot be achieved by a sudden radical change of approach, but demands a number of smaller cumulative step-changes, many of which Parliament can initiate or suggest but cannot necessarily lead.

Parliament itself because of arcane traditions and the complexity of its processes and procedures
The narrow range and overall lack of parliamentary coverage in the media
Weaknesses in the delivery of political literacy education in schools, in the community and voluntary sector
The dearth of informal learning opportunities through public libraries and social networks.

Connecting Citizens to Parliament identified the importance of face-to-face contact and the local area as key themes combined with the value of Parliament coming to the people rather than expecting people to come to Parliament and the necessity of placing information about Parliament in accessible places where citizens live out their daily lives. Recommendations for action include:

Availability of easy-to-read information on Parliament's business and relevance to local life and topical issues in a number of different formats (print and digital)
Wider engagement in third-party online spaces such as MumsNet and MoneySavingExpert.com
Use of popular newspapers to advertise when public consultations are being held
Development of a programme for trainee journalists to raise awareness of an interest in the work of Parliament
Wider use of Citizen Juries and local meetings in order to feed back the public's views
Development of a national network of educators/ambassadors at local and regional level who can actively disseminate information in their own community spaces and workplaces.

Dr Andy Williamson, Director of the Hansard Society's Digital Democracy programme, commented: ‘Parliament has done a lot of work to improve public awareness but is still only able to reach a fraction of the public. There remains a large group of citizens who don't know and don't care about Parliament. This can't be good for our democracy. Our recommendations for action involve not just Parliament but other vital players such as educationalists and the media who can take the lead in encouraging citizens to learn more about how Parliament affects their lives and what part they can play in its work'

For further information, contact Virginia Gibbons, Head of Communications at the Hansard Society on 020 7438 1225 or mediaprog@hansard.lse.ac.uk

Editors' Notes

The Hansard Society is the UK's leading independent, non-partisan political research and education charity.
The Hansard Society Digital Democracy Programme's thought-leading research has been a formative part of an emergent digital Britain from the internet's impact on Parliament, to better government engagement with citizens and the potential for civil society to harness digital media. The Digital Democracy Programme undertakes research and produces publications and commentaries with a focus on online political communication and citizen engagement, exploring the many faces of digital inclusion, citizen engagement, political campaigning and parliamentary process.
Connecting Citizens to Parliament survey was carried out online by ICM with a random sample of 2,005 adults (aged 18 or over) across Great Britain between August 25 and 26, 2010.
Connecting Citizens to Parliament focus groups were held in Peterborough, Poplar, Nairn, Sheffield and Usk between April and August 2010.

The last blog...

admin — Wed, 17 Aug 2011 15:55:00 GMT

This is my last blog as Director of the Digital Democracy Programme. After three and half years I'm heading to new pastures, or rather old ones... back to the world of the independent consultant, this time London-based but still globally focussed.

When I started in this role I wrote about the current state of the digital democracy landscape. A lot has changed since then, not least the rapid acceleration of social media. A lot, too, has not changed - or not changed enough. When I started, Downing Street's e-Petitions were going strong. Now we have the new system on DirectGov and the quality remains dubious but the latent opportunity is still there. Beyond that, more MPs are talking digitally. More get it. More civil servants get it. But still the chain is being dragged and institutionally, despite moves to open up data, there is still significant resistance to transforming government, parliament and society into a more inclusive democratic and discursive space.

What has changed above all is that the internet has come of age. This is now a digital society where the majority of us are online and almost all of us are on mobiles. We've seen time and time again - in the 2010 general election, the Arab Spring and last weeks riots - that people now turn to digital because that's where they live their lives. Digital media is now an inherent part of society, so those organisations who ignore it do so at their peril.

I'm planning on staying around the Hansard Society as a Visiting Fellow, so I won't be a stranger. But in the meantime, keep up with what I'm doing or get in touch via my own website or on Twitter.

Dr Andy Williamson

Hansard Society at Festival of Politics

admin — Wed, 03 Aug 2011 14:49:00 GMT

Has Twitter changed the world? Social media and Scottish politics

Thursday August 25

1.30 - 2.30pm Room P1.02

Scottish Parliament, Holyrood Road

This event is free to attend

(Registration required at www.festivalofpolitics.org.uk )

This year's Festival of Politics in Edinburgh runs from 20 - 27 August and presents a diverse programme of events bringing together politics, media and the arts through performance, discussion and debate. One theme of this year's Festival is an exploration of how technological and cultural revolutions are influencing politics in an increasingly transparent and interactive world. The Hansard Society will be hosting an event which will consider whether the use of Twitter (and other social media) by participants in events such as the Arab spring has lessons for parliamentary democracies like Scotland.

Chair:

Lesley Riddoch - journalist and broadcaster

Speakers:

Andy Williamson - Hansard Society Director of Digital Democracy,
Peter Cruickshank - Research Fellow, International Teledemocracy Centre, Edinburgh Napier University.
Joan McAlpine MSP - SNP
Kezia Dugdale MSP - Scottish Labour

For further information on the Hansard Society event at the Festival of Politics, contact Virginia Gibbons, Head of Communications at the Hansard Society on 020 7438 1225 or mediaprog@hansard.lse.ac.uk

Editors' Notes

Find out more about the Festival of Politics programme and tickets :

Online from www.festivalofpolitics.org.uk
By telephone: 0131 473 2000 (calls via RNID Typetalk: 18001 0131 473 2000)
By post: to the Festival of Politics, Hub Tickets, The Hub, Castlehill, Edinburgh, EH1 2NE.
In person: The Scottish Parliament or The Hub.

Full details of the festival programme are available from www.festivalofpolitics.org.uk
The Hansard Society is the UK's leading non-partisan political research and education charity which exists to strengthen parliamentary democracy and encourage greater public involvement in politics. (http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/)

Parliamentary Broadcasting Agreement versus global media and the internet

admin — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 12:06:00 GMT

There's been a bit of talk in the media over the last few days about a recent edition of The Daily Show with Jon Stewart. The interest comes from Channel 4's decision not to show a particular internationally syndicated episode because it contained edited extracts of video from Parliament.

The problem lies in the parliamentary broadcasting agreement (PARBUL). This prohibits, by penalty of a few nights in the Tower no doubt, broadcasters from editing footage from the chamber. Which is exactly what the Daily Show did. After all, it's common practice everywhere else.

Channel 4 simply called it a ‘compliance problem'. But there's been a little bit of a moan in media circles about how archaic this all seems. The New Statesman sums it up well.

There are a couple of issues at play here. On one point, the New Statesman is absolutely spot on. The now well out of date broadcasting rules for Parliament have simply failed to keep pace. Not just with the internet but with the growth of digital broadcasting and global media consumption. It makes no sense that you can show footage from the UK Parliament in the US but to do so would be illegal in the UK. The problem goes further, as many MPs know only too well. PARBUL has been a nightmare for Members wanting to put clips of themselves up on their blogs and websites. The US Congress provides Members' offices with the tools to get near-live two minute segments; straight after a Member speaks, it's on their own website. Do that here and you're in trouble. Yes, it is ridiculous. And everyone knows it. That's why PARBUL has been renegotiated this year.

Which brings me on to the second issue here. As Radio 4's Today programme showed us this morning, taking a few words out here and there can and does change meaning. What the Daily Show did is fine for satire but we need to be careful when it comes to ensuring the media has a responsibility to broadcast exactly what was said in Parliament. What's OK for satire isn't OK for Newsnight, where it's definitely not acceptable to edit out any materially important part of a clip.

Finally though, as always, what you can't see on TV, you can see on the internet - the footage is freely available on YouTube.

Andy Williamson

Hansard Society eNewsletter - July 2011

admin — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:50:00 GMT

Parliament and Government

Sittings of the House and the Parliamentary Calendar

Dr Ruth Fox, Director of the Parliament & Government Programme, appeared before the House of Commons Procedure Committee on Wednesday June 29 to give evidence to the Committee's inquiry on the 'Sittings of the House and the Parliamentary Calendar'. The session involved a wide-ranging debate around the role and work of MPs and the balance of their responsibilities in Westminster and in their constituencies.

An audio recording of the committee meeting can be found here:

Citizenship Education

‘Peer Factor?' competition winning entries

The Lord Speaker's 2011 competition for 11 to 16 year olds ‘The Peer Factor: Who Would You Put in the House of Lords and Why?' received 286 entries representing the work of 499 young people. The House of Lords competition was run with the support of the Hansard Society and entries were judged initially by the Hansard Society's Citizenship Education Programme.

Three entries, representing the work of 12 young people, made it to the top.

Mary-Beth Patterson, submitted an essay nominating former chief executive of the Charity Commission, Andrew Hind.
Ten students from Class 8 Alpha, aged between 12 and 13 years old, at Bishop Challoner School in Kent, submitted a short film nominating Manola Toschi-Restivo, Director of Sport at the school.
Anna Mammedova, submitted an essay nominating Keith Ross, caseworker with the Welsh Refugee Council and a Green Party member and candidate in the 2010 General Election.

The winning entries can be read on the Parliament website.

The most recent HeadsUp debate - Animal Welfare...how much do you care? finished last week,you can read the report of the forum here. The forum involved nine parliamentarians and six animal welfare charities and the biggest area of debate for young people was about the use of wild animals in circuses. The debate attracted a number of students who were really passionate about animal rights.

The HeadsUp topic debates for 2011-2012 have now been decided and they include:

Equality (Sept 26 - Oct 14, 2011)
The Media (Nov 21-Dec 9, 2011)
The Family (March 5-23, 2012)
You and Society (April 30 -May 18, 2012)
Olympic and Paralympic Games (June 18 -July 6, 2012)

For updates on HeadsUp become a fan of us on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/pages/HeadsUp/138035572942199

Digital Democracy

Gender and Digital Politics
A new Digital Paper, Gender and Digital Politics, examines the online political participation of women and men and concludes that the gender imbalance online is the result of wider political exclusion, not digital exclusion.

Gender and Digital Politics is the fifth in an occasional series of short Digital Papers from the Hansard Society Digital Democracy Programme. It was written by Dr Andy Williamson and Freddy Fallon from the Hansard Society's Digital Democracy programme and Dr Mark Pack, Head of Digital at MHP Communications and Co-Editor, Liberal Democrat Voice.

Study and Scholars

With only two weeks left to go, the Summer 2011 Scholars Programme is almost at an end. The Summer programme has been very successful with an insightful visit to Edinburgh and a study trip to Oxford on the hottest day of the year. We wish our Scholars a safe trip home and the best of luck in the future. Preparations for the Autumn 2011 Scholars Programme are well underway with our next round of Scholars arriving on September 24.

We are very excited about the Hansard Scholars Programme 25^th Anniversary Reunion, which will launch on November 16, with an event at Speaker's House. The following few days will be filled with discussions, lectures and cultural activities to mark the Programme's successful quarter century. We are already taking bookings, which can be made via our website and Facebook page.

Upcoming events:

Has Twitter changed the world? Social media and Scottish politics

Thursday August 25, Scottish Parliament,
Room P1.02, 1.30pm - 2.30pm

Panel:
Andy Williamson - Director, Hansard Society Digital Democracy programme
Peter Cruickshank - Research Fellow, International Teledemocracy Centre, Napier University.
Joan McAlpine MSP - SNP
Kezia Dugdale MSP - Scottish Labour

Chair:
Lesley Riddoch - commentator and broadcaster

Information on how to book a place at this event will be available soon.

Hansard Society in the media

BBC
Political blogs: Why are they dominated by men?

Westminster and the move towards a digital democracy

The questions facing the Lord Speaker hopefuls

Libdem Voice
Lord Speaker election: Two Liberal Democrat peers standing

The Wall Street Journal
Men Dominate U.K Political Blogosphere

Hansard Society eNewsletter - June 2011

admin — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 09:47:00 GMT

Parliament and Government

A Year in the Life: from member of public to Member of Parliament
A new Hansard Society briefing paper, A Year in the Life: from member of public to Member of Parliament, by Hansard Society research fellow, Matt Korris, is a selected summary of interim findings of the Hansard Society's A Year in the Life: from member of public to Member of Parliament project. It is based on the analysis of two surveys of the new MPs, conducted in August 2010 and March 2011, to which approximately one quarter of the new intake responded.

The report finds long working hours and the competing demands of Westminster and constituency are proving detrimental to the family life of new MPs - yet despite this, most aspire to make politics a long-term career.

Evidence from the A Year in the Life study shows:

The 2010 new intake of MPs initially expected a 60-hour week (plus eight hours travel) but six months on were working a 69- hour week;
They split their working time 63% in Westminster and 37% in their constituencies - but constituency casework takes up the largest share of their time (28%), followed by constituency meetings/events (21%) and the Commons Chamber (21%);
A vast number of the new intake report that long working hours and Westminster/constituency demands have a detrimental effect on their personal and family lives - comments such as ‘overwhelming', ‘devastating' and ‘a struggle' are common;
Over half of new MPs (56%) took a salary cut on becoming an MP.

The research also confirms the degree to which the new MPs, who by definition were not involved in the expenses scandal, hold the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) in low regard. Eighty-five per cent were dissatisfied with the induction provided by IPSA at the beginning of the Parliament and six months on 79% still said they were dissatisfied with the workings of IPSA. Despite this, the vast majority of new MPs don't want to give up. At the start of the Parliament, 82% of new MPs aspired to make politics a long-term career and 55% aspired to become a minister. A final survey at the end of the new MPs' first year will reveal whether the reported impact on their personal lives has made them reconsider.

Matt Korris, author of A Year in the Life: from member of public to Member of Parliament commented: ‘These interim findings provide an early insight into the lives of the new MPs and the challenges they face. We need effective MPs in order for Parliament and our system of representative democracy to function successfully. These findings - that the new MPs are working long hours to the detriment of their personal and family lives - underscore the need for a review of the role of MPs not just to build an improved political system, but for the very well-being of MPs themselves.'

The final report of the A Year in the Life: from member of public to Member of Parliament project, supplemented with a third survey, interviews and discussion groups and additional research, will be published towards the end of 2011.

Citizenship Education
Over one hundred 11-18 year-olds took part in the HeadsUp online debate, Our Health...who is responsible? The forum took place from May 9 - May 27 and gave young people the chance to debate the important issues around healthy lifestyles, the NHS and who should take responsibility for their health. You can read the full report of the debate here. The next HeadsUp online forum for 11-18 year-olds, starting today will be focusing on animal welfare. We have MPs, Peers, MEPs and MSPs taking part as well as representatives from influential NGOs such as the RSPCA. HeadsUp.org.uk provides a platform for young people to participate in political debates and voice their opinions to decision makers. The site is also a teaching resource, designed specifically for citizenship lessons.

Study and Scholars
Last month the Scholars Programme was proud to welcome a particularly enthusiastic and zestful summer cohort, representing some of the most distinguished universities from across the pond. The Scholars had a three day study visit to Edinburgh, where they attended guest lectures delivered by MSPs, journalists and policy makers in and around Holyrood, gaining a comprehensive introduction to the abundant history and prevailing developments of devolution in Scotland. In other news, dates for the Hansard Scholars Programme's 25th Anniversary have been finalised as November 16 - 20. Further details will be made available on our website and Facebook page (facebook.com/HansardScholars).

Upcoming events:

Political and Civic Engagement in Wales in the age of the Big Society
Thursday June 23, 6.00pm, Pierhead, Welsh Assembly.

This event will discuss the findings of the Hansard Society's eighth annual Audit of Political Engagement which focuses on coalition politics, civic involvement and the Big Society. The event will comprise a presentation of the findings by the Audit authors Dr Ruth Fox and Matt Korris and a debate examining what this means in Wales.

Speakers:
Dr Ruth Fox (Director, Hansard Society Parliament & Government programme)
Matt Korris (Research Fellow, Hansard Society Parliament & Government programme)

Panel:
Graham Benfield (Welsh Council for Voluntary Action)
Mark Isherwood AM (Conservative)
Jenny Rathbone AM (Labour)
Professor Richard Wyn Jones (Cardiff University)

Chair:
John Osmond (Director, Institute of Welsh Affairs)

To register to attend email hans_admin@hansard.lse.ac.uk or register online.

Hansard Society in the media

Lancashire Evening Post
Short shrift for long hours claim

Birmingham Mail
New MPs feel ‘dissatisfied'

The Scotsman
Overworked, pay cuts, little family life and media pressure - welcome to life as an MP

Scottish Sun
Our Lives so MP

Daily Express
We work too hard, say new MPs

Daily Mail
New MPs say their lives have been ‘devasted' by working in Commons (despite £65,000 salary!)

BBC.co.uk
Backbench power