As part of the Hansard Society's longer-term 'A Year in the Life' study of newly-elected legislators, this 2011 report explored the experience of MPs elected in 2010. The report found that long hours and the competing demands of Westminster and constituency were damaging new MPs' family life – yet most such MPs aspired to make politics a long-term career.
Entering Parliament as a new MP is a daunting experience. Exhausted from months of campaigning, they are faced with a huge and multifaceted job for which no job description exists.
New MPs need to master the traditions and procedural complexities of the Commons, set up their offices, hire staff, find personal accommodation and re-arrange family life – and that is all before they can properly begin working as a legislator and constituency representative. The challenges are significant and there is no time to waste – the voracious demands and expectations of constituents, party and the 24/7 media are present right from the start.
The general election saw the largest turnover of MPs since 1997, with 232 new Members elected (including five returning MPs who had previously lost their seats). For this new intake there is also the added pressure of the post-expenses scandal climate: there is an expectation among the public and media that the culture and practices of Westminster will change on their watch.
So how do the new MPs approach their many and varied tasks and meet the expectations placed upon them? What do they think of Parliament and what are their hopes for the future? What has the transition from being a member of the public to becoming a Member of Parliament been like?
The findings in this briefing paper begin to answer these questions. The new MPs are working extremely long hours and, despite spending more of their working week in Westminster, it is constituency casework that takes up the largest portion of their time. They are largely satisfied with how Parliament works, but the hours, the division of time between Westminster and their constituency and the effects of IPSA’s expenses system combine to make the maintenance of any semblance of a family life a struggle for many of them. Yet despite the difficulties, the majority hope to make politics a long-term career and many aspire to take on a second job as a minister.
This briefing paper 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.
More than half of new MPs (56%) have taken a salary cut on becoming an MP, with almost a third (31%) taking a cut of £30,000 per annum or more.
The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) is a source of considerable discontent for the new MPs, despite the fact that they are untainted by the expenses scandal. Eighty-five per cent of the new MPs were dissatisfied with the induction provided by IPSA and, six months on, 79% were still dissatisfied with the workings of IPSA.
New MPs start off expecting a 60 hour week (plus eight hours travel) but find themselves working 67 hours per week. Six months on this had increased to an average 69 hours per week.
A vast number of the new MPs have found the job has a significant negative impact on their personal/family lives. Comments such as ‘overwhelming’, ‘devastating’, ‘detrimental’ and ‘a struggle’ are common.
The new MPs split their working time 63% in Westminster and 37% in their constituencies.
Yet it is constituency casework that takes up the largest portion of their time (28%), followed by constituency meetings/events (21%) and the Commons Chamber (21%).
Seventy per cent of the new MPs are dissatisfied with Early Day Motions (EDMs). The sitting hours of the House of Commons (51%) and Private Members’ Bill procedures (43%) are the next least popular.
In contrast there is almost universal satisfaction with many other aspects of Parliament. More than 90% are satisfied with select committees, second readings, the business in Westminster Hall, urgent questions and ministerial statements.
Eighty-two per cent of the new MPs aspire to make politics a long-term career; 55% hope to become ministers.
The most eagerly anticipated parliamentary aspects of the role of an MP are working in all-party groups and on select committees, with 98% and 87% of the new MPs indicating they were keen to get involved with these at the start of their first year.
Our reports on the experiences of the 2005 and 2010 intakes of MPs were used by the House of Commons Administration Committee during its inquiries into post-election services. House of Commons officials used the research in particular to inform the improvement of the orientation and induction offerings provided to Members after the 2010 and 2015 general elections. The research was also used by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) during its Review of MPs' Pay and Pensions.
After 2011, the 'A Year in the Life' research was extended to Members newly elected that year to the Scottish Parliament, Welsh Assembly and Irish Dáil. This expansion of the research allowed the generation of comparative insights and the potential for learning and exchange of best practice among the four parliaments and assemblies involved.
In our latest ‘Whipping Yarn’, we talk with Simon Hart, former Conservative Chief Whip during Rishi Sunak’s Premiership. Hart opens up about his time in one of Westminster’s most demanding and discreet roles, chronicled in his new book, ‘Ungovernable: The Political Diaries of a Chief Whip’.
If a crisis or major national event occurs during a period when Parliament is adjourned, there are often demands from MPs, the media and the public for Parliament to be ‘recalled’. But the House of Commons Standing Orders stipulate that only Government Ministers - in reality, the Prime Minister - can ask the Speaker to recall the House. In recent years the House of Lords has generally been recalled at the same time as the House of Commons.
In response to the Modernisation Committee's call for views on 17 October 2024, we submitted evidence outlining key areas we believe the Committee should prioritise. Our submission recommended a focus on: strengthening legislative scrutiny, with particular emphasis on reforming the delegated legislation system; enhancing financial scrutiny, especially in relation to the Budget and the Estimates; addressing strategic gaps in parliamentary scrutiny; making more effective use of parliamentary time; and reviewing the Standing Orders, language and rituals of the House of Commons.
This briefing explains what to watch for during the Second Reading debate of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on 29 November. It outlines the procedural and legislative issues that will come into play: the role of the Chair in managing the debate and how procedures such as the 'closure' and 'reasoned amendments' work. It looks ahead to the Committee and Report stage procedures that will apply if the Bill progresses beyond Second Reading. It also examines the government's responsibilities, such as providing a money resolution for the Bill and preparing an Impact Assessment, while addressing broader concerns about the adequacy of Private Members’ Bill procedures for scrutinising controversial issues.
In this ninth instalment of our special mini-podcast series, we continue to explore the latest developments in the progress of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, often referred to as the assisted dying bill. We are joined by Dr Marie Tidball MP to discuss the amendments she has secured for a Disability Advisory Board and an independent advocate for people with learning disabilities.
