Parliamentary reform

Let’s seize the moment and radically reform parliament

May 2009 will no doubt go down in history as one of the most turbulent and damaging months for parliament. But I strongly believe that we can take advantage of the current mood of reform created by the MPs’ expenses scandal. I have long been a supporter of constitutional reform, but have become – often justifiably - used to being told that “the public just aren’t interested”. Recent events however have turned the spotlight on the workings of our democracy, creating a once in a generation opportunity for wholesale reform.

From interacting with the legislative process to just walking around the Palace of Westminster, I have always felt slightly unwelcome. It’s a difficult emotional response to define, but many agree that our parliament often feels more like a St James’ gentleman’s club than the legislature of a 21st century democracy. Indeed, I suspect many people would be shocked after just an hour long visit. The general public are limited to certain parts of the parliamentary estate and are herded through in a manner which hammers home my view that many parliamentarians – and also the officers who serve parliament – are uncomfortable with the simple reality that their purpose is to serve the British public. As a one time tutor in constitutional law, I taught the great principle of parliamentary sovereignty – that parliament is the supreme authority in the land. Of course, this principle was established as an assertion of parliament’s new status in light of the monarch’s diminished powers and without reference to the public parliament serves; this great constitutional principle was established at a time when parliament was woefully unrepresentative of the general population.

If today’s parliament was founded to take power from the Crown then we should be ready for the natural completion of that aim: reform designed to place the British people at the centre of our great democracy and not merely the institution of parliament. First and foremost the House of Lords: it is totally unacceptable that our Upper House should be populated with unelected members. The reforms that began in 1999 with Labour’s removal of the majority hereditary peers should be completed. Our country requires a confident, efficient and capable revising chamber that can legitimately scrutinise the work of the House of Commons. This does not need to be a large chamber – remember the US Senate has just 100 senators – but its members need to be well supported in their role and fit for purpose.

Secondly, electoral reform of the House of Commons itself is necessary. I’m ambivalent as to whether the House of Commons is too large, although I am struck at just how many names of errant MPs I have failed to recognise in the last couple of weeks. What is more important than size is legitimacy. I have long held the view that our voting system needs overhauling. Firstly, I’d like to see the ‘alternative vote’ system introduced so that voters can rank candidates in order of preference. This would serve the dual purpose of electing an MP who has to appeal to voters beyond their traditional base (as they would be fighting for second preferences etc.) whilst maintaining the constituency link, which is a virtue of our current system and which many other forms of proportional representation would remove.

And thirdly the working practices of the House of Commons need to be brought into the modern age. There has been consternation from many voters that they submit to the daily commute from London to their home town, yet their MP is entitled to a second home a few miles from Westminster. Of course many of these voters do not work until two o’clock in the morning as is often the case in the House of Commons (just look at last week’s Finance Bill). If we want our MPs to live similar lives to their constituents then we should expect that they are granted the same work-life balance as everyone else.

More importantly in how the House of Commons works however, is reform of the legislative process itself. It should be for parliament, not government, to control the legislative timetable. And Select Committees, which should be holding government to account, should be freed from party whips’ control through direct election of members and their chairs. Further, Select Committees should be granted the administrative support and legal powers they need to truly investigate the affairs of government and effectively hold the executive to account.

Clearly for the sake of brevity I’ve sailed superficially through the massive reforms I believe are necessary to strengthen our democracy and begin to modernise our parliament. However, these are issues that I hope to return to in greater depth as the momentum for reform gathers pace.

Kevin McKeever is Labour PPC for Harborough

21 May 2009 17:30

 

Comments

Be the first to comment on this item.