Hansard Society in the Media

Hansard Society Chair pays tribute to Lord Holme

admin — Tue, 06 May 2008 09:48:00 GMT

Peter Riddell pays tribute to his Hansard Society Council colleague and the former Chair of the Society, after the sad news of the death of Lord Holme over the weekend. Peter said:

"Richard Holme, Lord Holme of Cheltenham, who died at his home in Sussex on Sunday after a long battle with cancer, was central to the expansion of the Hansard Society to its current size and prominence. He served for three decades on our Council and for six years as our Chairman, until June last year. Throughout, he displayed an uncanny skill and astuteness, both in spotting where the next opportunities lay for the Society and in his dealings with members of the Council, with staff, and supporters in Parliament and outside. He always saw the big picture and ensured that the Society was actively involved in new challenges affecting Parliament. Apart from the expansion of the Society under his Chairmanship - which largely overlapped with Clare Ettinghausen's period as Chief Executive - he set up a successful and influential commission under the Hansard Society's auspices into how Parliament should communicate with the public. This was chaired by Lord Puttnam, now a Vice Chair on the Hansard Society's Advisory Council.

"But, above all, Richard Holme had a zest and enthusiasm for politics, combined with a commitment to improving the way we are governed. His long involvement with the Hansard Society went alongside his leading part in the debate over constitutional reform and his role as a close adviser on strategy to David Steel and Paddy Ashdown as leaders of the Liberals and, then, the Liberal Democrats. Richard Holme was a generous, warm and witty man who will be much missed by all who knew him and everyone at the Hansard Society."

There are also obituaries of Lord Holme in The Times, The Guardian, The Daily Telegraph, The Financial Times and the BBC.

Lords of the Blog goes global!

admin — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 09:42:00 GMT

Lords of the Blog, the Hansard Society's innovative, blogging experiment, has attracted interest from countries as distant as Australia, America and Japan. Contributors to Lords of the Blog, such as Lord Soley, Lord Tyler and Baroness D'Souza have been discussing their new pet project far outside the confines of the 'Westminster Village' and interest in this unique blog has been growing.

The Guardian Public magazine named Lords of the Blog as their 'Website of the Month' this April and Lord Soley has been discussing the project with the Community Radio Network in Australia. To listen to the interview with Lord Soley click here. To post comments on Lords of the Blog you don't need to register - just visit - http://lordsoftheblog.net and let them know what you think.

Audit of Political Engagement - March 27, 2008

admin — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 10:49:00 GMT

The Hansard Society's fifth Audit of Political Engagement, published today, reveals a high level of public ignorance about politics and constitutional arrangements in Britain.

The launch of Audit of Political Engagement was covered by:

The Scotsman
South Wales Evening Post
The Guardian (Polly Toynbee)
The Times (Peter Riddell)
The Economist
The House Magazine
Today in Parliament, Radio 4
The Week in Politics, Radio 4
Good Morning Wales, BBC Radio Wales

Lords of the Blog - March 14, 2008

admin — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 10:40:00 GMT

The launch of Lords of the Blog was covered by:

BBC News online
The Telegraph
Comment is Free
Comment is Free (separate article)
The Guardian
ABC News
The Week in Westminster on Radio 4 and on numerous blogs both in the UK and abroad

No Overall Control? The impact of a 'hung parliament' on British politics - March 11, 2008

admin — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 10:32:00 GMT

The issues raised in No Overall Control? were debated on the Today Programme on Radio 4 where Austin Mitchell MP and Lord Norton argued about whether a hung parliament would be beneficial.

The launch event was also covered by Mark Darcy on Today in Parliament on Radio 4 and covered by Andrew Sparrow on Guardian Unlimited

Lembit Opik and Sarah Teather debate the role of the individual in party politics - 19 Sept 2007

admin — Mon, 01 Oct 2007 12:39:00 GMT

The first of the Hansard Society’s fringe events at this year’s series of Party Conferences was a massive success. Delegates and panelists debated the controversial topic of political parties including, whether individual MPs should have more freedom from the party whip, methods to engage suppporters using new technologies and how the Liberal Democrats can be more representative. The panel included: Ros Taylor from The Guardian, Lembit Opik MP, Sarah Teather MP, Ed Davey MP and Steve Webb MP. Katie Razzall from Channel 4 News chaired the event.

Lembit Opik MP, commented that the public, “would rather see failed dreamers than people with no dream at all”.

To see comment on the event please visit the BBC Website

Additional video footage of the meeting is on The Daily Politics Show Website

Sir John Major in conversation with Elinor Goodman - 25 Apr 2007

admin — Sat, 29 Sep 2007 21:27:00 GMT

A Hansard Society and LSE Public Discussion

At yesterday evening’s event at the LSE, Sir John Major spoke to Elinor Goodman from the Hansard Society Council on a wide range of issues covering Europe, the Iraq war, ‘sofa’ government, party leadership and when resignation is the right thing to do.

Watch the whole event on BBC Parliament (Freeview 81, Sky 504, Virgin TV 612) on Saturday April 28 at 9pm

Listen to Elinor Goodman interviewing John Major on The Week in Westminster, Radio 4 on Saturday April 28 at 11am.

Read about the event on BBC, Guardian Online, The Independent, The Times and Comment is Free.

Audit of Political Engagement 4 - 30 Mar 2007

admin — Fri, 28 Sep 2007 15:52:00 GMT

The fourth Audit of Political Engagement undertaken jointly by the Hansard Society and the Electoral Commission was launched at a meeting in the House of Commons on Tuesday March 27. Speakers were Rt Hon Hazel Blears MP, Justine Greening MP, Lord (Paul) Tyler, Peter Riddell (The Times and Hansard Society)

Read more:
The Times
ePolitix

The meeting opened with an introduction from Glyn Mathias, a commissioner at the Electoral Commission, who pointed out that although indicators showed a period of relative stability with no decline from the last Audit, there was still a large minority who were completely disengaged from politics. There was also a continuing worrying age differential – only 24% of 18-24 year-olds would vote in an election tomorrow compared to over 70% in the 55+ age group.

Hazel Blears said that politicians were paying less attention to opinion polls than they used to as in recent months polls had become less of a guide. If politicians followed polls slavishly, they would never take decisions. She thought that the Audit confirmed the de-politicisation of our society. The pursuit of democratic party politics is seen as a disreputable and dishonest activity. Party politics is becoming a minority interest. She stressed that political parties are a fundamental part of a democracy and it is desirable that party politics should be central to people’s lives – rather than as a brand removed from people’s lives. She called on everyone interested in these issues to celebrate politics as being central to a vibrant democracy.

Justine Greening said that the problem is the disconnect between issues and ‘politics’. It is worrying that each new cohort of young people is less likely to vote. This doesn’t mean that they don’t care – they are very switched on to issues such as climate change and make poverty history. Young people have to understand that they need to vote. Not only does it make a difference at national level, it matters at local level as there are very few ‘safe’ seats. Politicians and those involved in the political world must talk about issues such as crime that directly affect young people.

Paul Tyler said that there was a missing link between people who want to have a say in how the country is governed and people who feel that they actually do have a say. This points up the disconnect between interest in political issues and feeling able to influence the way the country is run. At election time, he said, there are only about 150 seats (marginals) where the parties concentrate their efforts. There is a correlation between the perception that it’s worth voting and actually voting. He stressed that polls are only snapshots. The most important thing is effective dialogue. We have to learn new ways of communicating using new technology. We have to engage supporters, not just members of political parties.

Peter Riddell said that in the debate about the nature of politics, no-one has quite agreed what is wrong. It is over-simplistic to say if only we had more direct democracy for people to get involved then the problem would be solved. An example is the Downing Street e-petitions. These should be parliament not government exercises. He stressed that polls are only as useful as the nature of the questions asked. People have contradictory views and often don’t understand the issues involved. The Audit shows up these contradictions. There is a danger of assuming that there is a pool of untapped activists out there just waiting to be asked to get involved. The real challenge is to make our representative system work better – connecting people between as well as at elections. We need to improve the representative system’s mechanisms.

Digital Dialogues Phase One Report - 1 Mar 2007

admin — Fri, 28 Sep 2007 15:50:00 GMT

Digital Dialogues is an independent investigation into the use of online technologies to promote dialogue between central government and the public.

Lords Reform - 9 Feb 2007

admin — Fri, 28 Sep 2007 15:46:00 GMT

On Tuesday February 6, The Hansard Society published a timely Briefing paper on Lords Reform containing exclusive research by YouGov on the public’s attitides. The Briefing was covered by:

BBC Online
The Times
Politics.co.uk
The Independent

Register at hans_admin@hansard.lse.ac.uk to attend a Hansard Society Lords Reform debate on Tuesday February 20 at 5pm. Speakers include Jack Straw MP, Theresa May MP and David Heath MP

Friend or Foe? Lobbying in British Democracy - 1 Feb 2007

admin — Fri, 28 Sep 2007 15:40:00 GMT

At a packed meeting last night in Portcullis House, Sam Coates from The Times, Pete Digger from DLA Piper’s Global Government Relations Practice and John Bercow MP debated the issue of lobbying and its place in our parliamentary democracy. The meeting was chaired by Clare Ettinghasuen, Hansard Society Chief Executive.

The event saw the launch of a new publication from the Hansard Society – Friend or Foe? Lobbying in British Democracy. You can read about the report on BBC Online
The report was also covered in Third Sector and Public Affairs News.

Ben Atfield from Ellwood and Atfield, who supported the report, opened the meeting by pointing out how the public affairs sector had grown massively over the past 10 years but current information about lobbying in the UK is very poor and doesn’t capture the changes that have happened over this period. Friend or Foe? Lobbying in British Democracy is intended to open up discussion in this area.

Dr Phil Parvin, author of the report, acknowledged that there is a high degree of scepticism about lobbying both among the public and politicians. He pointed out a paradox: on the one hand, the public is changing the way it acts in ways which afford greater power and influence to a range of lobby organisations. On the other hand, however, these same citizens who support these lobby organisations and look to them to represent their views often express scepticism of the practice of ‘lobbying’. He outlined the content of the report and hoped that it provided a platform for further discussion of this area.

Sam Coates from The Times joked that he had two rules when speaking to lobbyists – first, don’t call them lobbyists and second, don’t speak about brown paper bags of cash. He emphasised that lobbying was a relatively straightforward practice which shouldn’t be feared or demonised and acknowledged that the lobbying industry has cleaned up its act over the past few years. But, he said, there were still issues to be examined. For example, should lobbyists write reports in the name of MPs? Should lobby firms charge large amounts of money for ‘client dinners’?. He concluded that lobbyists must defend their own industry and not turn in on themselves. In his opinion, lobbyists were quite insecure about people’s suspicions of their industry – it is up to the lobbyists themselves to make the case for their industry.

Pete Digger from DLA Piper’s Global Government Relations Practice spoke up for the lobbying industry – it is young, dynamic and sophisticated and forms an important part of what happens in our democracy. He acknowledged that lobbyists are often treated with suspicion and that there are different regulatory codes across the industry. The most important factor that all lobbyists must abide by is transparency. He didn’t mind when journalists ran stories about lobbyists – that sort of scrutiny is vital. In his judgement, lobbyists provide a bridge between companies and government. They are needed because the proceedings of Parliament are not clear or easy to access. He could think of five or six pieces of legislation that were better because of lobbying – for example, the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.

John Bercow MP said that balancing conflicting interests was at the heart of government. That arbitration had to take place so it is reasonable for pressure to be exerted by individuals or organisations – that is lobbying. He said that the word ‘lobbying’ possesses undeservedly unfavourable connotations but stressed that it was a perfectly reasonable thing to do – to try to influence public policy for the better. The process of lobbying is predictable and when conducted openly and legitimately it is perfectly acceptable. He acknowledged that there are issues which are unsettling – for example, he can’t see the merits of providing access for a fee. He stressed that only a small number of MPs are extremely well informed about everything. There are many subjects about which they know very little and they welcome contact from expert organisations who wish to give their point of view. Only gullible MPs will be swayed by lobbyists. He agreed with the report’s conclusions that charities are very effective at getting across their points of view and gave examples of Help the Aged, Prisoners Abroad, Amnesty and Stonewall. – all excellent at synthesising their core message in a pithy brief. He concluded by agreeing with the sentiment that MPs complaining about lobbying was like sailors complaining about the sea and stressed that transparency and accountability are vital.