This 2005 report reviewed the evidence on public attitudes towards MPs and political institutions, and presented findings on MPs' own views of their relationship with voters. It set out a far-reaching agenda for change in the relationship between electorate and the elected in the interests of building public trust and encouraging democratic renewal.
It is not a new phenomenon that the public has a low opinion of MPs. But social and cultural changes are weakening the traditional identities and institutions that bound people into the act of voting and the system of representative democracy, and increasingly replacing them with more individualistic and transactional attitudes.
In most people's minds, modern politics is formal and remote. If it touches their lives, it is generally seen as something that is done to them by an elite they dislike and distrust, operating in institutions that are distant, irrelevant and ineffective.
Civic activism is strong, and this interest and involvement is certainly 'political' in a broader definition. However, political parties and elected politicians are not doing enough to ensure that their politics is connected to the everyday activities and aspirations that are a part of people's lives.
The heart of the argument made in this report is thus that 'politics' needs to be redefined so it is no longer seen as a remote process 'administered' by an exclusive elite but instead as an interactive pursuit connected to the everyday activities and aspirations of the public. There needs to be a cultural shift in politics, led by elected representatives and their political parties. Civic activism needs to be connected with political activism in a broader understanding of politics which is not limited to the party political or the activities of professional politicians.
The relationship between elected representatives and the electorate requires investment from both sides - the latter to take an informed interest and actively offer their views, and the former to take a great deal more trouble to seek, listen and respond to public concerns. Although MPs already face a difficult task in balancing their parliamentary duties with party pressures and constituency casework, to these must be added extra roles: setting out more clearly the service their constituents can expect, better promoting the work they do to hold the government to account and, perhaps most importantly, spearheading the renewal of representative democracy by informing and consulting their constituents about politics in a way that reaches beyond the bounds of most current political debate.
The report suggests steps that could be taken by politicians, Parliament, political parties, the media and the education system to increase public confidence and trust in the job MPs do.
The report was co-authored by Mark Gill, Head of Political Research at the lpsos – MORI Social Research Institute; John Healey MP; and Declan McHugh, Director of the Hansard Society’s Parliament & Government Programme.
The report supplements its review of existing research on public attitudes to political institutions and elected representatives with findings from interviews with MPs across the political spectrum.
Introduction
Political knowledge, understanding and attitudes
Public perceptions of MPs
The politicians’ perspective
Looking ahead
The UK Spending Review outlines how Government funds will be allocated over several years. Unlike the Budget, which raises revenue, the Review decides how it is spent. But how is it approved? What role does Parliament play if it doesn’t vote on the Review itself? This blog explores how the Spending Review works, how it differs from the Budget, and how Parliament holds the Government to account through the Estimates process.
On Friday 13 June, the House of Commons will once again debate the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which would legalise assisted dying in England and Wales. Specifically, it will hold a second day of Report Stage, during which the whole House will debate and vote on amendments. This briefing explains the structure of Report Stage, what happened on the first day of Report Stage, how amendments are selected and grouped, on which amendments a decision can still be taken, and the likely sequence of events this Friday, including whether a final vote will take place.
The Chancellor, Rachel Reeves MP, will deliver a statement on the Spending Review. MPs will resume Report Stage of the assisted dying bill and debate key legislation on football governance, mental health, and planning and infrastructure. Peers and MPs are expected to resolve their standoff over AI and copyright in the Data (Use and Access) Bill. The Commons Defence Committee will hear from the lead reviewers of the Strategic Defence Review, while a Lords Committee will examine the Chagos Archipelago sovereignty issue. The Hansard Society’s Director will give evidence to the Modernisation Committee about access to the House of Commons and its procedures.
In this episode, we explore why ministers keep bypassing Parliament to make major announcements to the media — and whether returning to the Despatch Box might help clarify their message. We unpack the Lords' uphill battle to protect creators’ rights in the Data Use and Access Bill, challenge claims that the Assisted Dying Bill lacks scrutiny, and examine early findings from a Speaker’s Conference on improving security for MPs, as threats and intimidation against politicians continue to rise. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.
Our evidence on treaty scrutiny has been published by the House of Lords International Agreements Committee. Our submission outlines the problems with the existing framework for treaty scrutiny and why legislative and cultural change are needed to improve Parliament's scrutiny role. Our evidence joins calls for a parliamentary consent vote for the most significant agreements, a stronger role for Parliament in shaping negotiating mandates and monitoring progress, and a sifting committee tasked with determining which agreements warrant the greatest scrutiny.
