Reforming Parliament |

Wednesday 20th May 2009 | 17:17

Reforming Parliament

Panellists debate ideas for reinvigorating and re-empowering parliament

In the first part of our series on reforming parliament, the majority of the PHI100 said they wanted to see a more powerful Commons better able to hold the executive to account. In this second half, the experts and insiders tell us what they would do.

As a general principle, more than 3 out of 4 panellists want to see the power of the executive reduced in favour of boosting parliament. That desire is shared by a majority of left-leaning, right-leaning and Lib Dem panellists.

Top Three Reforms

The three most favoured reforms are led by giving parliament a constitutional role in confirming quango and government appointments, a reform favoured by more than three quarters of panellists. The next is giving parliament a constitutional role in signing off on major spending decisions, a move favoured by nearly two thirds of panellists. A majority of the PHI100 also want to see a reduction in the power of the whips by having more free votes and some secret ballots.

A non aligned panellist objected to secret ballots on the grounds that: 'you should be able to know how your MP voted.'

A right-leaning strategist proposed: 'more power to select committees and a separate career path for MPs'

Changing The Commons

There's a bit less consensus about how the composition of the Commons should be reformed. Only two proposals command majority support. Two thirds of the panel want to see a reduction in the number of MPs. Interestingly, that has quite heavy support even among the MPs on the panel. Perhaps they believe they would survive the cull. A majority of panellists also favour fixed parliamentary terms.

There's good support, but falling below a majority, for the following: proportional representation, open primaries, a written constitution, giving voters the power to 'recall' MPs as in the United States, and giving a substantial salary increase to MPs.

Term limits for MPs doesn't attract much support. Only a third of panellists think that the archaic dress worn by some Commons officers and traditional customs are problems in serious need of reform.

A right-leaning panellist declared: 'There should be no more than 500 MPs.'

A number of panellists supported a pay rise for MPs but were wary of the current climate. A left-leaning panellist said: 'We do need to pay MPs more, but now is not the time to make the case for it.'

A media panellist was 'in favour of just about anything that will encourage diversity.'

Leave a comment...

Chris

10:04 |
21 May 2009
0

I'd vote for any or all these changes, but aren't you guilty of just playing "fantasy Parliament" while one of the worst governments in history subbornly clings to power?

Just how much of this will still be on the agenda when Brown is finally dragged kicking and screaming to the polls next year?

That's of course if he doesn't use chaos theory to declare an end to elections and consign voting to an independent regulator, votes-r -off.

david

10:31 |
21 May 2009
0

Proportional representation, never again a government with a, 'huge' majority. Huge majorities breed: arrogance. complacancy and corruption.

John

12:15 |
21 May 2009
0

Proportional Representation breeds greater problems such as minority parties holding the balance of power and insisting on crazy legislation as a condition of their support. Also, you can end up with the problems of Italy where the Government changes every 5 minutes and nothing ever gets done. I prefer a system where coherent policies can be enacted which you really only get with FPTP. I concede that this current Government's level of consistency and joined-up-thinking has been spectacularly low but I hope this is the exception that proves the rule.

Alex

14:43 |
21 May 2009
0

Off all of these a written constitution is the most important. It is the means by which the outdated doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty [which, as Jonathan Freedland showed in the guardian yesterday, is the prime cause of the Government’s and MPs’ disregard for the public] can at last be replaced by popular sovereignty, which is the necessary precondition for a healthy democracy.

Roger

21:39 |
26 May 2009
0

Is it a tactic of this site to 'air-brush' out the only reform that really matters - Fair Voting?

leo collins

19:54 |
01 Jun 2009
0

There must be a radical change in the way parliament operates, covering individual expenses. Yet more drastic changes are needed! There are too many councillors costing the council tax payer millions. If you study this project you will see that in most cities there are three councillors per ward, serving on a part time basis and earning anything from £14,000----£40,000 PA.Reducing this to one councillor per ward on a full time basis with a salary of £25,000 PA would save millions over the years in one ward alone people would save £17,000 pounds, and one fulltime councillor would be well paid for their work. Not only that, you would probably get a better class of councillors applying to do the job. Some at present are way below the standard required

Username:
Password:
Remember Me
Forgotten details?

The Live Wire

+What we do...

+Sections

+Explore

+PRO

+On the Go

Find your MP

Insider Research

Understanding the heart of Westminster