Archived Press Releases

Audit of Political Engagement 10

admin — Thu, 16 May 2013 13:24:00 GMT

New Hansard Society research shows further decline in public’s certainty to vote
BUT improved perceptions of Parliament’s work

The 2013 Hansard Society annual Audit of Political Engagement 10, published May 15, shows that the public are so disillusioned, disenchanted and disengaged from politics that:

Just 41% of the public say they are certain to vote in the event of a general election, compared to 48% last year and 58% two years ago.
The public’s propensity to vote is now the lowest ever recorded in the Audit series.
Only 12% of 18-24 year olds say they are absolutely certain to vote – compared to 22% last year and 30% two years ago.
20% of the public say they are ‘absolutely certain not to vote’ - compared to 16% last year and double the number who said the same two years ago (10%).
Only 42% of the public say they would vote in an election in the future ‘if they felt strongly enough about an issue’; that 58% of people are still not prepared to vote even if they feel strongly, suggests serious disillusionment with the efficacy of voting.

However, there has been a recovery in the number of people who would like to be involved in ‘decision-making’:

47% of the public say they would like to be involved in local decision-making (up 9 percentage points from last year).
42% say they would like to be involved in national decision-making (also up 9 percentage points compared to last year).

The Audit also tracks the public’s attitudes to MPs and the Westminster Parliament and this year there are mixed results. Although there has been no change in people’s satisfaction with Parliament overall (27% are satisfied), two aspects of Parliament’s work are nonetheless viewed much more favourably than previously:

47% agree that Parliament ‘holds government to account’ – up from 38% last year.
55% agree that Parliament ‘debates and makes decisions about issues that matter to me’ – up from 49% last year.

However, knowledge of and satisfaction with MPs are at their lowest levels in the Audit series:

Only 22% of the public can correctly name their own MP – compared to 38% two years ago (the last time this question was asked).
23% are satisfied with the way that MPs generally are doing their job – compared to 29% in 2010.
34% are satisfied with the way their own MP is doing his/her job – compared to 38% in 2010.

This year’s Audit of Political Engagement 10 also explores public knowledge of politics:

Responses to a series of political quiz questions show that:
- 57% of the public are unable to correctly identify that British members of the European Parliament are directly elected by British voters.
- A third of the public (33%) do not correctly identify that members of the House of Lords are not elected.
- Nearly three in 10 (29%) think that 16 is the minimum age for voting.
55% of the public agree that politics and government seem so complicated that ‘a person like me’ cannot really understand what is going on.

Dr Ruth Fox, Director and Head of Research at the Hansard Society and co-author of the report, commented:

‘These results, coming on top of the low election turnouts last year, should be an urgent warning to all the political parties. Every voter – of whatever age – has to want to participate and feel that by exercising their vote they can make a difference. But as the Audit trends show, fewer and fewer people are convinced about the value of voting than at any point in the last decade. This raises serious questions about the future health of representative democracy.’

‘The public’s improved view of Parliament can perhaps be explained by the increased profile of select committee activity in tackling issues such as phone hacking and taxation of multinational corporations. The topicality of backbench business debates, e-petitions, and the restoration of the Urgent Question to ministers may all have contributed to a growing sense that Parliament is standing up to government more and that the issues it is addressing chime more with the public interest and mood.’

For further information, contact Virginia Gibbons at the Hansard Society on 020 7710 6079 or 07812 765 552 or email comms@hansardsociety.org.uk.

Editors' Notes:

The Hansard Society is an independent, non-partisan political research and education organisation, working in the UK and around the world to promote democracy and strengthen parliaments.
The Audit of Political Engagement is the only annual health check on our democratic system. Now in its 10th year, each Audit measures the ‘political pulse’ of the nation, providing a unique benchmark to gauge public opinion across Great Britain with regard to the political system.
It is published by the Hansard Society with funding support from the House of Commons and the Cabinet Office.
The information in the Audit of Political Engagement 10 is based on a Political Engagement Poll undertaken by TNS-BMRB on behalf of the Hansard Society. The findings are based on a total of 1,128 face-to-face interviews conducted between 14 and 18 December 2012, which have then been weighted to the national population profile of Great Britain.
View Audit co-author Matt Korris on YouTube discussing Audit findings and connective research with Professor Gerry Stoker, University of Southampton.

New Hansard Society research shows further decline in public’s certainty to vote BUT improved perceptions of Parliament’s work

admin — Thu, 16 May 2013 10:46:00 GMT

Audit of Political Engagement 10

The 2013 Hansard Society annual Audit of Political Engagement 10, published May 15, shows that the public are so disillusioned, disenchanted and disengaged from politics that:

Just 41% of the public say they are certain to vote in the event of a general election, compared to 48% last year and 58% two years ago.
The public’s propensity to vote is now the lowest ever recorded in the Audit series.
Only 12% of 18-24 year olds say they are absolutely certain to vote – compared to 22% last year and 30% two years ago.
20% of the public say they are ‘absolutely certain not to vote’ - compared to 16% last year and double the number who said the same two years ago (10%).
Only 42% of the public say they would vote in an election in the future ‘if they felt strongly enough about an issue’; that 58% of people are still not prepared to vote even if they feel strongly, suggests serious disillusionment with the efficacy of voting.

However, there has been a recovery in the number of people who would like to be involved in ‘decision-making’:

47% of the public say they would like to be involved in local decision-making (up 9 percentage points from last year).
42% say they would like to be involved in national decision-making (also up 9 percentage points compared to last year).

47% agree that Parliament ‘holds government to account’ – up from 38% last year.
55% agree that Parliament ‘debates and makes decisions about issues that matter to me’ – up from 49% last year.

However, knowledge of and satisfaction with MPs are at their lowest levels in the Audit series:

Only 22% of the public can correctly name their own MP – compared to 38% two years ago (the last time this question was asked).
23% are satisfied with the way that MPs generally are doing their job – compared to 29% in 2010.
34% are satisfied with the way their own MP is doing his/her job – compared to 38% in 2010.

This year’s Audit of Political Engagement 10 also explores public knowledge of politics:

· Responses to a series of political quiz questions show that:

o 57% of the public are unable to correctly identify that British members of the European Parliament are directly elected by British voters.

o A third of the public (33%) do not correctly identify that members of the House of Lords are not elected.

o Nearly three in 10 (29%) think that 16 is the minimum age for voting.

· 55% of the public agree that politics and government seem so complicated that ‘a person like me’ cannot really understand what is going on.

Dr Ruth Fox, Director and Head of Research at the Hansard Society and co-author of the report, commented:

‘These results, coming on top of the low election turnouts last year, should be an urgent warning to all the political parties. Every voter – of whatever age – has to want to participate and feel that by exercising their vote they can make a difference. But as the Audit trends show, fewer and fewer people are convinced about the value of voting than at any point in the last decade. This raises serious questions about the future health of representative democracy.’

For further information, contact Virginia Gibbons at the Hansard Society on 020 7710 6079 or 07812 765 552 or email comms@hansardsociety.org.uk

Editors' Notes

The Hansard Society is an independent, non-partisan political research and education organisation, working in the UK and around the world to promote democracy and strengthen parliaments.
The Audit of Political Engagement is the only annual health check on our democratic system. Now in its 10^th year, each Audit measures the ‘political pulse’ of the nation, providing a unique benchmark to gauge public opinion across Great Britain with regard to the political system.
It is published by the Hansard Society with funding support from the House of Commons and the Cabinet Office.
The information in the Audit of Political Engagement 10 is based on a Political Engagement Poll undertaken by TNS-BMRB on behalf of the Hansard Society. The findings are based on a total of 1,128 face-to-face interviews conducted between 14 and 18 December 2012, which have then been weighted to the national population profile of Great Britain.
View Audit co-author Matt Korris on YouTube discussing Audit findings and connective research with Professor Gerry Stoker, University of Southampton - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVtvAT2OhUI

Are we living our lives online?

admin — Wed, 24 Apr 2013 11:46:00 GMT

Under-18s debate the impact of the internet on them and on wider society

Monday 29 April - Friday 17 May 2013

Headsup.org.uk

Most under-18s would find it hard to recognise a world where the internet didn’t play a central role. But how much consideration do young people give to issues of privacy? Do they see the internet as good for democracy? And do they think that we need to improve the way people behave online?

The next HeadsUp debate will address these issues and will run from Monday 29 April - Friday 17 May. Politicians and other decision-makers will be taking part in the debate with young people – Lord Toby Harris gives his views on the themes to be discussed:

‘My view - for what it is worth - is that at present many people are too relaxed about how much they say online about themselves and what they are doing...There is an intimacy about communications online, which is why some people feel that intrusive marketing is so unsettling and in the same way why some are so badly affected by cyber-bullying. What is the answer to this and is it something that the Government can do anything about?’

The Are we living our lives online? debate will remain open 24 hours a day over the three-week period to allow users the opportunity to drop in and out of the debate. Discussion topics include;

· Is the internet good for democracy? - Should governments ever be able to restrict the internet? Is online activism as meaningful as campaigning face-to-face?

· Has the internet made it easier for us to be mean to each other? - Does the ability to conceal our real identities make us more likely to be nasty? Do the normal rules of society still apply on the internet?

· How much do you value your privacy online? - Do we ignore the consequences of putting our personal lives online? Do corporations like Facebook and Google really have a right to use the personal information we post?

· Is the internet changing society for the better or the worse? - Could we lose map reading or mental arithmetic skills because of technology? Do you learn more from going online, than you do in a classroom?

HeadsUp is an online space where young people can discuss political issues that affect them. The forum, a safe pre-moderated space, can help students to increase their own political awareness, and links them with key decision-makers in the subject area so their voices are heard by those who matter.

Background information is provided so that students can learn about the issues and back up their arguments with facts and figures, ensuring that the debates are well-informed and of high quality.

The forum is also an effective teaching resource, particularly used for the Citizenship curriculum, with each debate supported by lesson plans and activities which can be used in class.

Decision-makers confirmed for the debate so far include:

Lord Toby Harris – Treasurer, Internet and Communications Technology All-party group
Rebecca Evans AM – Member, Children and Young People Committee
Emma Carr – Deputy Director, Big Brother Watch

You can see all the statements from decision-makers taking part in this debate on Who’s Listening?

MPs, Peers, MEPs, AMs, MSPs, MLAs and representatives from NGOs and organisations working in the technology sector are invited to join the debate. Please contact HeadsUp Project Manager, Beccy Allen at beccy@hansardsociety.org.uk for more information.

Editors' Notes

HeadsUp 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.

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 log in to post comments (11-18s and supporting teachers/youth workers only).

There are over 1,000 schools currently registered with HeadsUp.

HeadsUp has been running debates for young people since 2003, but regrettably, the Are we living our lives online? debate (the 50^th), will be the last forum. Unfortunately, funding to maintain and to redevelop the project for a new generation of young people has proved impossible to source in the current financial climate. The Hansard Society would like to extend its thanks to all the politicians, organisations, teachers and students that have been involved in the debates over the last 10 years. The HeadsUp project wouldn’t have been possible or as successful as it has been without your support!

Can Parliament seize the opportunity to better communicate parliamentary democracy in a digital world?

admin — Thu, 28 Mar 2013 13:57:00 GMT

A new Hansard Society report points the way forward

The landscape of print, broadcasting and social media is changing rapidly and how it alters affects Parliament’s ability to communicate and engage with the public it serves. A new report from the Hansard Society – #futurenews: The Communication of Parliamentary Democracy in a Digital World – explores these strategic communication trends and how Parliament needs to respond in order to keep pace and ensure it has a voice in the political debate commensurate with its role at the apex of our democracy.

#futurenews examines changing patterns of news consumption, the public’s attitude to news about politics in general, and Parliament in particular, and how and where they access such news. The report finds that, given the UK’s position at the forefront of mobile device and smart-phone ownership, and with one of the highest penetration rates for social networks anywhere in the world, Westminster has a huge opportunity to enhance public knowledge and understanding of its work. But if it gets it wrong, there could be serious consequences for public engagement in the future.

Key findings include:

· Parliament’s approach must evolve in response to the developing ‘social’, ‘mobile’, ‘local’, ‘data’ and ‘video’ trends.

· Parliament’s unique selling-point is its authoritative place at the apex of our democracy but at present it does not get a hearing commensurate with its role. It could and should be one of the most trusted sources for high-quality political and public policy information.

· It can insert itself into public debate in a legitimate and appropriate way, and add value to the political conversation, by creating a useful pathway through what would otherwise be an avalanche of information. It can be more ‘anticipatory’ in its approach, providing advance warning and foresight of interesting issues coming up and seeding links to relevant parliamentary content. On the most topical issues of the day more effort should be made to curate material from across Parliament in order to create an essential ‘go to’ online resource hub for any person or organisation that is interested in it – e.g. phone hacking or House of Lords reform.

· It has to be quicker and more topical, providing ready access to granular, micro-themed content packaged to people’s issue-driven interests, and offer a greater variety of ‘glance-able’ content in the form of graphics, pictures and video designed to garner people’s attention.

· It needs to better identify online communities with a specific audience interest with whom it can build connections and seed content. There is a potentially large audience for current and historic material which needs to be proactively disseminated and shared to sites where it can be contextualised to meet the needs of that particular audience interest.

But Parliament must prioritise and focus: it cannot do everything across all platforms and devices for all forms of media. Specifically, it should:

o Appoint a Community Team (for each House or on a bi-cameral basis) to build links with online communities with specific audience interests and an AV media officer to produce rich in-house content to populate the website and be disseminated to a variety of audiences.

o Invest in its broadcasting and digital infrastructure to enable a wider range of online sites to take its material.

o Produce contextualised video news releases and make video of up to two minutes’ duration available copyright free, with attribution for any user to download and embed.

o Revise the broadcasting rules, particularly for regional select committee visits.

o Live-log, time-code, tag and key-word Hansard, and improve the website search functionality in order to enable people to access relevant material more quickly.

Dr Ruth Fox, Director and Head of Research at the Hansard Society and joint author of #futurenews: The Communication of Parliamentary Democracy in a Digital World, commented:

‘The public have a right to expect Parliament to communicate its work quickly and clearly and to make information freely accessible in ways that keep pace with how we all access news today, particularly through mobile devices and video. The news cycle has changed and information is now disseminated and exchanged at lightning speed and Parliament can’t afford to fall behind.

‘In an online, networked world in which people are overwhelmed with an avalanche of information, Parliament could and should be one of the most trusted sources of high-quality political and policy information. It has the content at its disposal; it is a massive storehouse of interesting facts and information but most of it isn’t being used effectively. What it needs are the communication strategies and infrastructure to bring all the building blocks of content – text, sound, image, video – together to develop compelling news and information packages that will be of genuine interest to the public.

‘Given the UK’s position at the forefront of mobile device and smart-phone ownership, and with one of the highest penetration rates for social networks anywhere in the world, Parliament has a huge opportunity to enhance knowledge and understanding of its work. But if it fails to grasp the challenge there could be serious consequences for public engagement in the future.’

For further information, contact Virginia Gibbons at the Hansard Society on 020 7710 6079 or 07812 765 552 or email comms@hansardsociety.org.uk

Editors’ Notes

#futurenews: The Communication of Parliamentary Democracy in a Digital World explores the key strategic trends of the digital era that will have an impact on Parliament and how it needs to re-shape its own approach to keep pace with these external changes.
#futurenews highlights trends and developments across the communications sector and why they may particularly matter for Parliament. It also sets out how Parliament might respond to these challenges, drawing on examples from other sectors and legislatures.
#futurenews is based on an extensive literature review coupled with seminar participation, workshop discussions, newsroom visits, semi-structured interviews and one-to-one conversations with an array of journalists and commentators, academics, technology leaders, social media experts, communications and public engagement specialists and parliamentary officials in the UK and abroad.
The research was supported by the Group on Information for the Public, UK Parliament.
The Hansard Society believes that the health of representative democracy rests on the foundation of a strong Parliament and an informed and engaged citizenry. A charity, founded in 1944 and working in the UK and around the world, we are an independent, non-partisan political research and education Society devoted to promoting democracy and strengthening parliaments. (www.hansardsociety.org.uk)

New Sex & Power report finds women are missing from top roles in politics and public life

admin — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 12:16:00 GMT

Three quarters of MPs are men

90% of bank CEOs are men

Two thirds of public appointments go to men

Almost 90% of chief constables and police & crime commissioners are men

Two thirds of local councillors are men

Sex and Power 2013: Who Runs Britain?

- Britain is falling down the global league tables when it comes to women’s access to power and representation in politics

- Continued ‘drift’ is inevitable without real, committed and targeted action

- Political parties should take steps to ensure an increase in the number of women candidates fielded in winnable seats at all levels of politics

The Counting Women In coalition has today published Sex and Power 2013: Who Runs Britain?The report examines the presence - or lack thereof - of women in politically powerful positions in politics and other spheres of public life in the UK today, including the police, the education sector, the arts and the world of finance. It then goes on to consider the implications of a country largely governed by men, and makes a series of recommendations for tackling the dearth of women in influential positions.

Key findings include:

· just 22.5 percent of MPs are women, 21.7 percent of peers and 17.4 percent of the Cabinet. Women make up 13.3 percent of elected mayors and 14.6 percent of Police and Crime Commissioners.

· Britain is falling down the global league table when it comes to the representation of women in politics, as other countries move forward faster: in 2001 we were ranked 33 out of 190 countries, but by the end of 2012 we had fallen to 60^thplace.**

· women are similarly ‘missing’ in many other spheres of public life: just 36.4 percent of public appointments are women, 13.6 percent of the senior judiciary and 5 percent of Editors of national daily newspapers.

· women’s absence is particularly marked in finance and economy: there are no women at all on the Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee; women hold just 11.1 percent of UK Bank Chief Executive positions, 17.3 percent of FTSE 100 Director positions and make up just 15.1 percent of members of Local Economic Partnerships.

The report explores the impact of this dearth of women at the top tables of public life, and concludes that:

The lack of diversity in public life weakens democracy and public confidence in it;

Women make a positive difference to actual decision-making itself; excluding them from politics and other areas of public life means missing out on the substantial benefits greater involvement of women would bring, while also wasting the huge investment made in women and girls through the education system and beyond;

A more diverse body politic with a wider spread of expertise and reflecting the life experience of both halves of the human race would be better placed to lead us through the complex times that face us.

Real, committed and targeted action is required; failure to do so means the UK will continue to ‘drift.

The report makes six recommendations:

Political parties should take immediate action to increase the number of women candidates at all levels of election with a view to fielding as many women candidates from as wide a variety of backgrounds and communities as possible in winnable seats in 2015. This should include active consideration of positive action measures in selection processe

In order to enable everyone concerned to develop a much better understanding of the issues, a monitoring form similar to that used in recruitment for public appointments and applications for funding should be introduced. It would be completed and submitted to returning officers by all candidates together with nomination forms at all levels of election, and the results collated and published annually. This requirement should be implemented at the 2014 English local and European elections

Government should pilot a new government-wide scheme in 2014 to increase women’s presence, profile and participation in the 2015 general election and beyond. This could be done by drawing together experience from the UK and abroad which could be used to improve both the participation and the candidacy of women of all backgrounds in Britain

Government, political parties and others should act to implement the recommendations of the Speaker’s Conference Report published in 2010.

In addition to adopting the proposals for cultural change in public life contained in reports such as the Speaker’s Conference, the Councillors’ Commission, and the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s Pathways to Politics, steps should be taken to develop a much wider set of proposals for improving the culture of both politics at all levels and the media coverage of them.

All organisations – public, private and third sector - should take steps to ensure that, at meetings and events, both women and men appear on platforms as speakers, and editors and broadcasters should also take responsibility for commissioning contributions from both women and men as commentators and experts. Individual citizens should be encouraged by to object to men-only platforms, panels and programmes.

Nan Sloane, Director of the Centre for Women and Democracy said:

‘This report shows a shocking absence of women from powerful roles in Britain. We are often told that it’s just a matter of time before we have equality, but we have already waited for generations; asking us to wait still more will change nothing, and the quality of decision-making in our democracy and public life will suffer as a result. There needs to be meaningful action now if next year’s report is to show real progress.’

Katie Ghose, Chief Executive of the Electoral Reform Society said:

“These missing women offer the most vivid illustration of parliament’s failure to keep up with the times. Politicians will struggle to connect with voters as long as the combined talents and perspectives of half the population are shut out. Party leaders admit there’s a problem, but all have failed to find a lasting solution. It’s not a good look for the Mother of all Parliaments to be left lagging behind on the fundamental issue of women’s representation.”

Ceri Goddard, Chief Executive of the Fawcett Society, said:

“ It’s simply scandalous fact that in 2013 men still outnumber women 4 to 1 in parliament. If political parties don’t take urgent action, Britain will continue to fall down the global league table when it comes to women’s access to power and representation in politics.”

"The number of women in the Cabinet is at a ten year low. Failure to increase the number of women around the top table of politics sends a message to other walks of life and to the next generation for whom we hope for something different, that excluding women from positions of power is acceptable.”

“Women’s votes will determine the next election – remaining male dominated won’t help the parties on polling day”

Ruth Fox, Chief Executive of the Hansard Society said:

“Parliament needs to show leadership in reflecting the people it governs and serves. Decisions made in Parliament affect women and men equally and the dearth of women in positions of political power not only reflects badly on the quality of our democracy, it also wastes the skill, expertise and life experience of half the population and sets a terrible example for other professions and industries. It’s time for Parliament and political parties to take concrete steps to increase the number of women in politics.”

Alex Runswick, Deputy Director of Unlock Democracy, said:

"The lack of female involvement in UK politics is a canary in the mining shaft; it is a particularly visible example of how the system fails to represent people more widely. Our democracy and public life is weaker because it misses the skills experience and talents of over half the population. It is not enough to recognise the problem and simply hope that things will improve; we need Parliament and politicians to take urgent action."

ENDS

Notes to editors:

For further information please contact:

Charlie Woodworth

Charlie.woodworth@fawcettsociety.org.uk / 020 7253 2598 / 07767297812

Claudia Laidlaw

claudia.laidlaw@electoral-reform.org.uk 020 7928 1622 / 0759 801 9738

(1) The Centre for Women and Democracy, the Electoral Reform Society, the Fawcett Society, the Hansard Society and Unlock Democracy have joined together to form the Counting Women In coalition to address the lack of women in politics. We believe the under representation of women in Westminster, the devolved assemblies, and town halls around the UK represents a democratic deficit that undermines the legitimacy of decisions made in these chambers. Together, we will be fighting to ensure women have an equal presence and voice within our democratic system.

(2) Copies of the full report “Sex and Power 2013: Who Runs Britain?” are available at www.countingwomenin.org.uk or from the above contacts.

*Since the report was written in late 2012, a series of elections have been held and the Inter Parliamentary Union league table has been updated, we are now (in February 2013) ranked joint 57^th

Should more women be in charge?

admin — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 16:11:00 GMT

Under-18s debate gender and power with politicians

4-22 March 2013

Headsup.org.uk

Why is there still a pay gap between men and women? Why are there so few female MPs? Why are the top jobs in business and the media dominated by men?

From Monday 4 March the HeadsUp forum – Should more women be in charge? – will be open for under-18s to debate with politicians and key decision-makers what is holding women back from reaching the top of their professions.

Dame Tessa Jowell MP, one of the participants in the forum, says: ‘When I was Women’s Minister I did a fairly big piece of work interviewing 500 young women around the country to understand the pay gap and to understand to what extent it was a given which victimised young women in the workplace and to what extent it represented the nature of their choices. What really shocked me about that consultation was how so many girls linked their lack of progression to dissatisfaction with their appearance. The body image phenomenon is an understated part of this whole dynamic.’

The Should more women be in charge? debate coincides with International Women’s Day (8 March) and runs from Monday 4 March - Friday 22 March. It will remain open 24 hours a day over the three-week period to allow users the opportunity to drop in and out of the debate. Discussion topics include;

Why is there still a gap between men and women’s pay? – Do women still face discrimination in the workplace? Why are the majority of the world’s poor women and not men?
Does it matter whether your MP is male or female? – What puts women off politics? How can we get more women into the top political jobs?
Is childcare still seen as primarily a woman’s job? Will changing maternity leave to parental leave change attitudes to childcare? Are women discriminated against by employers for having children?
Why are sectors like journalism and business still mostly male? - Should we use the law to get more women in the boardroom? Do we need more female role models in the scientific & technology industries?

HeadsUp is an online space where young people can discuss political issues that affect them. The forum, a safe moderated space, can help students to increase their own political awareness, and links them with key decision-makers in the subject area so their voices are heard by those who matter.

Background information is provided so that students can learn about the issues and back up their arguments with facts and figures, ensuring that the debates are well-informed and of high quality.

The forum is also an effective teaching resource, particularly used for the Citizenship curriculum, with each debate supported by lesson plans and activities which can be used in class.

Decision-makers confirmed for the debate include:

Dame Tessa Jowell MP
Ann McKechin MP
Baroness Campbell
Baroness Deech
Baroness Lister
Alison Johnstone MSP
Rosemary Butler AM – Presiding Officer, National Assembly for Wales
Phil Bennion MEP
Liz Gardiner – Working Families

You can see all the statements from decision-makers taking part in this debate at Who’s Listening?

If you are an MP, Peer, MSP, AM or MEP who is interested in issues of gender and would like to be involved in the debate, please contact HeadsUp Project Manager, Beccy Allen at beccy@hansardsociety.org.uk for more information.

Editors' Notes

HeadsUp 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 final HeadsUp forum planned for the 2012-13 school year is:

29 April - 17 May 2013 - Are we living our lives online?

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 log in 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.

Good news for Parliament

admin — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:43:00 GMT

Public perception of Parliament’s effectiveness shows signs of improvement,

says new Hansard Society research

On the day the House of Commons debates the effectiveness of select committees (Jan 31, 2013), initial results from the Hansard Society’s 2013 Audit of Political Engagement 10 demonstrate some interesting improvements in the public’s perception of Parliament over the course of the last year.

The latest results show:

A 9 percentage point rise in those agreeing that ‘the UK Parliament holds government to account’ (47% in Audit 10 (2013) compared to 38% in Audit 9 (2012))

A 5 percentage point rise in those agreeing that ‘the UK Parliament debates and makes decisions about issues that matter to me’ (54% in Audit 10 (2013) compared to 49% in Audit 9 (2012))

Dr Ruth Fox, Director and Head of Research at the Hansard Society, commented: ‘These latest Audit findings can perhaps be explained by the increased profile and topicality of select committee activity over the last year. The issues they have tackled such as phone hacking and taxation of multinational corporations have chimed with the public and may be really helping to improve public perceptions of Parliament’s effectiveness.’

‘But there is still scope for further improvements. The Hansard Society called for, and gave evidence to, the Liaison Committee’s recent inquiry into select committee effectiveness, resources and powers and many of our ideas have been adopted. We hope MPs will now support implementation of the Committee’s recommendations and build on the progress that has been made.’

For further information, contact Virginia Gibbons at the Hansard Society on 020 7710 6079 or 07812 765 552 or email comms@hansardsociety.org.uk

Editors' Notes

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.

The Audit of Political Engagement is an annual health check on our democratic system. Now in its 10th year, the study measures the ‘political pulse’ of the nation, providing a unique benchmark to gauge public opinion across Great Britain with regard to politics and the political process. It is published by the Hansard Society with funding from the House of Commons and the Cabinet Office.

The full Audit of Political Engagement 10 report will be published in the spring. Audit 10 is based on a public engagement poll conducted by TNS BMRB between 14-18 December 2012. TNS conducted face to face interviews with a nationally representative quota sample of 1,128 adults living in GB aged 18+.

The House of Commons Liaison Committee’s report – Select Committee effectiveness, resources and powers – will be debated by MPs on Thursday 31 January. It is expected to take place between 2pm and 5pm.

The Hansard Society gave oral evidence to the Liaison Committee’s inquiry into select committee effectiveness on 23 February 2012. The Society also submitted written evidence jointly with the Constitution Unit, UCL and the Institute for Government.

The Society first called for the Liaison Committee to conduct such an inquiry in an article in our Parliamentary Affairs journal in April 2011: ‘Reviewing Select Committee Tasks and Modes of Operation’ by Alex Brazier and Ruth Fox

Assembly Line? The Experiences and Development of new Assembly Members

admin — Tue, 22 Jan 2013 16:45:00 GMT

A new Hansard Society briefing paper, Assembly Line? The Experiences and Development of new Assembly Members, examines how AMs newly elected in 2011 have made the transition from members of the public to elected representatives of the National Assembly for Wales. Evidence from the study shows:

The new AMs initially worked an average 49-hour week (plus nine hours travel). One year later they worked an average 57-hour week;
In their first year, new AMs’ satisfaction with their work-life balance decreased considerably. Initially 83% were ‘fairly satisfied’ and 17% ‘not very satisfied’. One year on, 33% were ‘fairly satisfied’ and 50% ‘not very satisfied’
They split their working time fairly evenly between debates in the Chamber (22%), committee work (21%), constituency casework (21%) and constituency meetings and events (18%);
The new AMs were generally satisfied with the induction provided but would have benefited from more support in setting up their offices in the Assembly and the constituency;
Half of the survey respondents said the AM salary (£53,852) represented a salary increase; for the other half it was a decrease or no change from their previous employment;

The research also highlights new AMs’ satisfaction with committee work in contrast to frustration with the way in which other aspects of the Assembly work – in particular plenary debates, financial scrutiny and First Minister’s Questions. The new AMs are generally critical of the media coverage of the Assembly.

Matt Korris, author of Assembly Line? The Experiences and Development of new Assembly Members, commented: ‘These findings provide an insight into the lives of the new AMs and the challenges they face. Understandably they have complaints and frustrations about the role, but above all they draw great satisfaction from it, particularly the opportunities it affords them to help others through their constituency work. But there is clearly less satisfaction with the Assembly aspects of their role as legislators. As the debate about the future of the Assembly and its powers continues, political space is therefore needed for an inclusive discussion transcending party lines, focusing on the challenges AMs share in common if these issues are ever to be properly discussed.’

For further information, contact Virginia Gibbons at the Hansard Society on 020 7710 6079 or 07812 765 552 or email comms@hansardsociety.org.uk

Watch the full event

Editors’ Notes

Assembly Line? The Experiences and Development of new Assembly Members, will be discussed at a free event at 11.30am on Wednesday January 23, Pierhead Main Hall, Cardiff with Matt Korris, Senior Researcher, Hansard Society, Janet Finch-Saunders AM, Julie Morgan AM and Simon Thomas AM. The Presiding Officer, Rosemary Butler AM will open the event and the debate will be chaired by Laura McAllister, Professor of Governance, Liverpool University. To attend, email Assembly.bookings@wales.gov.uk or phone 0845 010 5500

The Hansard Society is the UK's leading independent, non-partisan political research and education charity.
Research for Assembly Line? The Experiences and Development of new Assembly Members was part-funded by the National Assembly
This study forms part of a wider comparative study the Hansard Society has conducted into the experiences of newly elected representatives at Westminster, Holyrood and the Dáil Éireann, the full results of which will be published later in 2013.

Congratulations to Hansard Society Co-President, Rt Hon John Bercow MP

admin — Wed, 05 Dec 2012 10:14:00 GMT

Politician of the Year – Political Studies Association Awards 2012

The Speaker and Hansard Society Co-President Rt Hon John Bercow MP was awarded Politician of the Year by the PSA. The judges explained their decision as follows:

‘Bercow has had a tremendous impact since the position became his in June 2009, consistently holding the Executive to account. During this time, there has been a shift in the way in which the House operates and his impact can be highlighted by the central role he has played in reforming Parliament in the wake of the expenses scandal. He is a deserved recipient if the Politician of the Year Award.’’

The PSA added:

‘In addition to his role following the expenses scandal, Bercow’s calls for House reform have expressed his desire for increased transparency, greater numbers of women and minorities in Parliament, more powers for Select Committees, as well as measures to help Parliament – not Government – set the agenda.’

Further details are on the PSA website

Are young people losing out on transport? - Nov 15

admin — Thu, 15 Nov 2012 12:37:00 GMT

Under-18s debate transport issues with politicians

26 November - 14 December 2012

Headsup.org.uk

Are fares for young people fair? Should money be spent on large-scale transport projects or invested locally? Are young people properly consulted on this issue?

From Monday 26 November the HeadsUp forum - Transport: paying too much for too little? - will be open for under-18s to debate transport issues with key decision-makers in this area. Taking part are MPs and peers from across the political spectrum, as well as key individuals from national and international transport organisations.

Background information is provided so that students can learn about the issues and back up their arguments with facts and figures, ensuring that the debates are well-informed and of high quality. The forum is also an effective teaching resource, particularly used for the Citizenship curriculum, with each debate supported by lesson plans and activities which can be used in class.

The transport debate will run from Monday 26 November - Friday 14 December. It will remain open 24 hours a day over the three-week period to allow users the opportunity to drop in and out of the debate. Discussion topics include;

Are transport fares fair?- Should under-19s get free travel on public transport (as the over-60s do)? Is it fair to pay full price train fares when you can't get a seat? Is our public transport worth the money?
Should there be more focus on local transport rather than expensive national projects?Is High Speed Rail essential? Do we need more airport space? Would better local transport links improve your job prospects?
How do you get about?What transport options do you have in your local area? Are services safe and reliable? What do you think would most improve public transport?
How can our transport choices have less impact on the environment?Should we invest in greener public transport? What would persuade you to cycle more? Will better technology help us to travel less?

Pat Glass, MP for North West Durham and PPS to Maria Eagle, Shadow Secretary of State for Transport, said:

"Young people's transport is an issue on which I feel very passionately. Before coming to Parliament I spent most of my career working in education with young people so I know first-hand just how important an affordable and reliable local transport system is to education and to a good social life."

Decision-makers confirmed for the debate include:

Pat Glass MP for North West Durham
John Howell MP for Henley
Lord Faulkner of Worcester
Haldene Dodd - Air Transport Action Group
Nina Renshaw -Transport and Environment

You can see all the statements from decision-makers taking part in this debate on Who's Listening?

If you are an MP, Peer, MSP, AM or MEP who is interested in transport issues and would like to be involved in the debate, please contact HeadsUp Project Manager, Beccy Allen at beccy@hansardsociety.org.uk for more information.

Editors' Notes

HeadsUpis 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.

Other forums planned forthe 2012-13 school year are:

4 - 22 March 2013 - Should there be more women in charge?
29 April - 17 May 2013 - Are we living our lives online?

Two ways to register to participate in HeadsUp:

1. 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.

2. 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 registerorlogin 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.

st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} Normal 0 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

Lords of the web

admin — Thu, 09 Aug 2012 15:00:00 GMT

In July, the Society was delighted to pick up a shiny new award at the prestigious Nominet Internet Awards for our work on Lords of the Blog.

The awards celebrate the achievements and innovations of UK internet initiatives across a range of categories, with the Lords of the Blog team proudly taking home the award for best 'Online public services & information' project.

If you've never heard of Lords of the Blog before, the purpose of the project is to provide a space for members of the House of Lords to engage in dialogue and discussion with the public. The Peers come from across all political parties, as well as from the Crossbenches, and their blog posts focus on life and work in the House of Lords. The bloggers write the posts themselves and respond to comments written by the public. In the four years that the project has been going, we've had in excess of 1,600 posts written by Peers and over 22,000 comments from the public.

Lords of the Blog can be followed on Twitter here @lordsoftheblog

Public satisfaction with media reporting of politics increases - July 13

admin — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 10:08:00 GMT

But tabloids do little to advance political engagement of their readers

The Hansard Society’s latest Audit of Political Engagement report (published Thursday July 12) shows that public satisfaction with media reporting of politics has risen: 45% claim to be satisfied compared to just 38% who said the same two years ago. But two thirds of the public perceive the coverage of politics in the tabloid media to be far more negative and distorting in its portrayal of politics and politicians than in all other media outlets. Notably, tabloid readers themselves strongly agree with this negative view of their own newspapers of choice.

Audit of Political Engagement 9, Part Two finds that the coverage of politics in all media, but the tabloid media in particular, contributes to a sense of fatalism among citizens about their capacity to influence the political process. Broadsheet readers, even controlling for demographic differences, are more likely to be politically engaged and feel they can exercise influence in the political process. But there is little evidence that tabloid newspapers help stimulate the political engagement of their readers, relative even to those who read no newspaper at all (data below in editors notes).

At the Leveson Inquiry, the views of leading politicians, journalist, academics and celebrities are being heard. The Audit explores what the public think about the relationship between politics and the media.

The research shows:

63% of the public (and 70% of tabloid readers) say tabloids ‘look for any excuse to tarnish the name of politicians’ – compared to 20% for broadsheets, 21% for TV programmes and 12% for radio programmes

63% of the public (and 71% of tabloid readers) say tabloids ‘focus on negative stories about politics and politicians’ – compared to 21% for broadsheets, 29% for TV programmes and 14% for radio programmes

68% of the public (and 74% of tabloid readers) say tabloids ‘are more interested in getting a good story than telling the truth’ – compared to 23% for broadsheets, 26% for TV programmes and 14% for radio programmes

When it comes to positive attributes, the research shows that TV programmes were judged to be ahead of the other forms of media. But the public do not give TV a ringing endorsement: only four or five in 10 people agree that it is fair in its representation of politics and helps the public learn about what is happening in politics.

38% of the public say TV programmes ‘do a good job of keeping politicians accountable for their conduct’ – compared to 34% for broadsheets, 29% for tabloids and 19% for radio programmes

41% of the public say TV programmes ‘are generally fair in their representation of politicians’ – compared to 27% for broadsheets, 15% for tabloids and 20% for radio programmes

55% of the public say TV programmes ‘help the public to learn about what is happening in politics’ – compared to 37% for broadsheets, 25% for tabloids and 26% for radio programmes

Previous Audit research has consistently revealed that most citizens are observers of, rather than active participants in, the political process and the media is the principal conduit by which they conduct that observation of politics. Audit 9 research shows that television is overwhelmingly the most common channel of communication (75%) for political news and information - with tabloids (27%), radio (26%), news websites (20%), broadsheets (16%) and social media (6%) a long way behind.

Throughout the nine-year annual Audit lifecycle, the media is the institution that the British public consistently believes has the most impact on their lives. This year’s Audit explores what kind of influence the public believe the media actually has on politics, the electorate and those they elect to office:

74% believe the media influences how people vote
60% believe the media influences the topics politicians debate in Parliament
54% believe the media influences the decisions politicians make

Dr Ruth Fox, Director of Research at the Hansard Society and joint author of Audit of Political Engagement 9, Part Two, commented:

‘The media plays a vital role in our democracy, providing citizens with access to and information about politics. Newspapers typically claim a right to freedom from regulation in the interests of democracy. But these findings suggest that the media – particularly the tabloids – do not greatly benefit our democracy from the perspective of nourishing political engagement.

Given the influence that the public thinks the media has, and the demonstrable link between readership and political engagement, the media ought to bear some responsibility for the consequences of its coverage of the democratic process and the willingness of citizens to engage in it. That power and influence should be balanced by some sort of independent, public interest, regulatory framework – supported by a more effective sanctions regime – which recognises and is designed to stimulate the responsibilities of the press alongside its rights within our democracy.’

For further information, contact Virginia Gibbons at the Hansard Society on 020 7710 6079 or 07812 765 552 or email comms@hansardsociety.org.uk

Editors’ Notes

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.

The Audit of Political Engagement is an annual health check on our democratic system. Now in its ninth year, the study measures the ‘political pulse’ of the nation, providing a unique benchmark to gauge public opinion across Great Britain with regard to politics and the political process. It is published by the Hansard Society with funding from the House of Commons and the Cabinet Office.

Newspapers are categorised by title as follows:

Type of newspaper	Newspaper title
Red-top	Sun, Mirror, People, Daily Star, Daily Record, Sunday Mirror, Sunday People, Sunday Sport
Mid-Market	Daily Express, Daily Mail, Sunday Express, Mail on Sunday
Tabloid	Red-top and mid-market newspapers
Broadsheet	Daily Telegraph, Guardian, Financial Times, Independent, Sunday Telegraph, Sunday Times, Observer, Independent on Sunday

Audit research findings - does a citizen’s choice of newspaper have any effect on their propensity to be politically engaged?

· 42% of general population are interested in politics compared to:

o 74% of broadsheet readers

o 56% of mid-market readers

o 40% of local paper readers

o 37% of red-top readers

o 31% of those who read no paper at all

· 44% of general population say they are knowledgeable about politics compared to:

o 70% of broadsheet readers

o 55% of mid-market readers

o 43% of local paper readers

o 39% of those who read no paper at all

o 35% of red-top readers

· 48% of general population say they are certain to vote in an immediate general election compared to:

o 64% of mid-market readers

o 62% of broadsheet readers

o 47% of local paper readers

o 44% of red-top readers

o 35% of those who read no paper at all

· 24% of general population think system of governing works reasonably well compared to:

o 42% of broadsheet readers

o 34% of mid-market readers

o 21% of local paper readers

o 21% of those who read no paper at all

o 14% of red-top readers

· 12% of general population feel they have influence over national decision-making and 24% feel they have influence over local decision-making compared to:

o 21% (national) and 36% (local) of broadsheet readers

o 18% (national) and 28% (local) of mid-market readers

o 11% (national) and 23% (local) of local paper readers

o 11% (national) and 21% (local) of red-top readers

o 7% (national) and 18% (local) of those who read no paper at all

· 40% of general population say they are knowledgeable about Parliament compared to:

o 68% of broadsheet readers

o 51% of mid-market readers

o 38% of local paper readers

o 32% of those who read no paper at all

o 31% of red-top readers

· 66% of general population say Parliament is essential to our democracy compared to:

o 90% of broadsheet readers

o 82% of mid-market readers

o 67% of local paper readers

o 59% of red-top readers

o 56% of those who read no paper at all

Broadsheet and tabloid readers’ relationship to politics - compared to a reference group of non-readers of newspapers (calculated using multivariate regression analysis)

Political Engagement Indicator	Broadsheet-only readers (compared to readers of no newspaper at all)	Tabloid-only readers (compared to readers of no newspaper at all)
Interest in politics	6.5 times more likely to express interest	1.5 times more likely to express interest
Knowledge of politics	7.3 times more likely to claim knowledge	1.4 times more likely to claim knowledge
Certainty to vote	3.5 times more likely to be certain to vote	1.4 times more likely to be certain to vote
Voted in last general election	2.5 times more likely to have voted	1.5 times more likely to have voted
System of governing works at least reasonably well	Roughly twice as likely to consider the political system to be working well	Marginally less likely to consider the political system to be working well
Efficacy of involvement in national politics	Twice as likely to think that if people like themselves get involved in politics they can really change the way the country is run	1.5 times more likely to think that if people like themselves get involved in politics they can really change the way the country is run
Efficacy of involvement in local area	Twice as likely to think that if people like themselves get involved in their local community they can really change the way that their area is run	1.2 times more likely to think that if people like themselves get involved in their local community they can really change the way that their area is run
Influence over national decision-making	Twice as likely to feel able to influence national decision-making	No more likely to feel able to influence national decision-making
Influence over local decision-making	2.5 times as likely to feel able to influence local decision-making	No more likely to feel able to influence local decision-making

The information in the Audit of Political Engagement 9, Part Two is based on a Political Engagement Poll undertaken by TNS-BMRB on behalf of the Hansard Society. The findings are based on face-to-face interviews conducted in respondents homes with a representative quota sample of 1,163 adults aged 18 or above living in Great Britain between 7 and 13 December 2011. The survey was repeated between 11 and 15 January 2012: 1,235 face-to-face interviews were carried out. Both surveys included booster sample interviews in Scotland, Wales and with respondents from Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) cultural backgrounds. The datasets have been weighted to the national population profile of Great Britain. For the purposes of the multivariate regression study the two survey datasets were pooled to provide a total of 2,404 cases for analysis.

The Audit also draws on the findings of 14 mixed demographic focus groups held across Great Britain between November 2011 and March 2012 exploring public attitudes to politics. This research was funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (RES-00-22-4441).

Audit 9, Part One, which explored public attitudes to the political process, was published in April 2012 and is available to download.

Lords of the Blog shortlisted for prestigious Nominet Internet Award - 3 July 2012

admin — Tue, 03 Jul 2012 14:01:00 GMT

Lords of the Blog shortlisted for award recognising the very best in online achievement and innovation

Lords of the Blog, has been shortlisted for the Nominet Internet Awards 2012, which showcase projects from UK businesses, charities, individuals and public and private sector organisations which help to make the internet a more secure, open, accessible and diverse experience for all.

Under the category, Online public services & information, the Hansard Society has been shortlisted for the Lords of the Blog project; a unique cross-party blog which provides a space for debate and dialogue between Members of the House of Lords and the public.

The Nominet Internet Awards celebrate the achievements and innovation of UK internet initiatives. The awards are open to any organisation or individual who is doing great work online, whether it benefits their business, the wider economy, local communities or the UK’s internet users in general. Over 65 organisations, initiatives and individuals have been nominated for awards this year. Entries were reviewed by an independent panel of judges, chaired by Rt Hon Stephen Timms, MP. The winners will be announced at an awards ceremony on Thursday 5 July 2012 at the Saatchi Gallery, London.

Each winner’s initiative will be showcased by Nominet at the next meeting of the United Nations’ Internet Governance Forum (IGF), taking place in Baku, Azerbaijan, in November, to help promote and develop industry best practice for the entire global online community. For the full list of shortlisted organisations, visit the Nominet Internet Awards website.

Lord Soley, the founding member of Lords of the Blog says: “Lords of the Blog is a great way to explain what the House of Lords is, who we are and what we do. We write the blogs ourselves and respond personally to the comments – there aren’t many places where we can have this kind of ongoing dialogue with the public on such important issues. Being shortlisted for this award is a reminder of how important these online spaces are for connecting parliamentarians with people up and down the country.”

Lesley Cowley, CEO of Nominet says: "We’re always inspired by the efforts British businesses, charities and individuals make on projects designed to help make the Internet a safe, accessible and helpful place, and this year’s awards has seen an incredibly strong list of candidates. By using the power of the web they are making a real difference to peoples’ lives, and providing a shining example to the rest of the world.”

For further information, contact Virginia Gibbons at the Hansard Society on 020 7710 6079 or email comms@hansardsociety.org.uk

Editors' Notes

About Lords of the Blog

Launched in early 2008, Lords of the Blog encourages dialogue between the public and Members of the House of Lords. This is where Peers write blogs on their specialist areas and talk about life and work in the House of Lords. We have a growing number of regular contributors as well as guest appearances from other Peers. To date the site has had more than 1,600 contributions from Peers and over 22,000 comments from the public

About the Hansard Society

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. We carry out robust and rigorous research into the role of Parliament, the future of representative democracy, and the public's engagement with politics and the political process. We also provide space for political debate and dialogue online, through engagement projects such as Lords of the Blog and HeadsUp.

About the Nominet Internet Awards

The Nominet Internet Awards celebrate the achievements and innovation of UK internet initiatives. The awards aim to showcase projects from UK businesses, charities, individuals and public and private sector organisations which help to make the internet a more secure, open, accessible and diverse experience for all.

About Nominet

Nominet is the not-for-profit organisation responsible for the smooth and secure running of the .uk infrastructure. A public service ethos drives everything we do – we strive to make the Internet an ever more trusted space for everyone who uses it. As one of the world’s largest Internet registries, we maintain a ‘directory’ of domain names ending in.uk, and run the technology which locates the computer hosting the website or email address you are looking for. Our public purpose is manifest in two principal investments – the independently run Nominet Trust and knowthenet.org.uk.

The Olympic Games... Do you feel part of it? - June 21

admin — Thu, 21 Jun 2012 16:07:00 GMT

11-18 year-olds are currently debating the values, legacy and commercial aspects of the Olympics and Paralympics

18 June - 6 July 2012

HeadsUp.org.uk

What do young people think about the Olympic and Paralympic Games? Have they noticed the effects of the Olympics in their area? Have they been inspired to do more sport? What do they think will be the legacy of the Games? For the next three weeks, under-18s will be debating all aspects of the Olympics with decision-makers online.

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 now online until Friday 6 July 2012 and all of the comments can be viewed throughout the three weeks without registration. The following topics are being discussed:

Olympic values - What are the Olympics for? Do the games involve enough ordinary citizens or are they just for VIPs? Should cheats get a second chance? Will the games bring people together?
Show me the money! - Has the Olympics become all about the money? Should athletes be paid to represent their country? Should this money have been spent on something else?
Paralympic games - Does expensive equipment rule out poorer nations? Are there enough opportunities for disabled children to get into sport? Does everyone have an equal chance to take part?
Green Games? - Are these really the greenest games ever? Should sponsors' attitudes to the environment matter? Building new stadiums every 4 years - is this a good idea for the environment?

Stephen Knight AM - Member of the London Assembly and Member of the Health & Environment Committee - is among the decision-makers taking part in the debate. He says:

‘It is worth remembering that the last time this country hosted the Olympics was back in 1948. What this means is that for anyone under retirement age, this year's Games will almost certainly be the only Olympics held within this country during their lives. Put another way this is a once in a lifetime event for most of us!'

Other decision-makers who are getting involved are:

Mohammad Asghar AM (Shadow Minister for Equalities & Sport in the National Assembly for Wales)

Tom Brake MP (Member for Carshalton & Wallington and previously Shadow Minister for London and the Olympics)

If you would like to be involved, or need more information, contact Beccy Allen at the Hansard Society on 02077106072 or beccy@hansardsociety.org.uk

Editors' Notes

HeadsUp 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.

Previous forums for the 2011-12 school year were:

26 September - 14 October 2011 :: How equal is Britain? [click here for report]
21 November - 9 December 2011 :: The Media: is it doing its job? [click here for report]
5 - 23 March 2012 :: What makes a good family? [click here for report]
30 April - 18 May 2012 :: What makes society work well? [click here for report]

Interested MPs, Peers, MSPs, MEPs 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:

1. 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.
2. 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.

‘Yes, we want to volunteer', say young people - May 29

admin — Tue, 29 May 2012 16:13:00 GMT

www.headsup.org.uk

Young people (11-18 year olds) taking part in the latest HeadsUp forum, What makes society work well? voiced enthusiastic support for volunteering, arguing that if under-18s had more to do and a greater stake in society, they would be less likely to get into trouble.

The What makes society work well? debate ran from 30 April to 18 May 2012 and discussed their views on ‘broken Britain', the role of Government in supporting society and whether young people should volunteer more in their local communities. The full report of the forum is available here.

The young people were divided as to whether Britain really is ‘broken':

‘I think that our society is broken because if you think about it.....the riots are a BIG example. If our society wasnt messed up...and broken then there wouldnt have been the riots right?'

‘I don't think Britain really is broken. If you think about it, how many riots have there been in your lifetime? Not many! How many people do you know that do drugs or commit crimes? Not many! So in my opinion it is mostly a huge generalisation based only on a few places in Britain.'

When it came to discussing whether young people were to blame, there was a strong sense that, while there should be more for young people to do, young people are often unfairly criticised and the adults should shoulder their share of the blame:

‘Parents should teach their children to behave and the lessons of life. Not just leave them to their own devises. If more adults were good role models there wouldn't be any problems now.'

Volunteering was viewed in a very positive light by most of the young people taking part:

‘I believe young people need to get more involved in their community because it will simply keep them out of trouble. It will solve the issue of street gangs'

‘I reckon that young people and people without a job should have to volunteer for something, so they have something interesting to do.'

But not everyone agreed:

‘...teenagers should be doing homework and working hard. On the week ends they should be spending time with their friends. Volunteering just curs child-hood short.'

‘...personally i have so much to do i would only have a hour to spare on sundays...'

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. 34 young people took part in the debate, with 134 posts; there were 4,939 visits to the website.
The full forum report for What makes society work well? 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:

Kevin Stewart MSP - Deputy Convenor of the Local Government and Regeneration Committee and sits on the Welfare Reform Committee
Stephen Gilbert MP - Member of the Select Committee on Communities and Local Government
Mark Drakeford AM - Chairs the Assembly Committee on Health and Social Care