The real value of this site must be the responses we get: comments and questions from our fellow citizens are likely to be much more productive than a one-way stream of statements from this building. So please keep them coming.
However, it will be difficult for us to reply to each and every one. As you may have discovered we do have other jobs to do here!
I wanted to react to a number of recent comments. We should explain that – while sometimes we do have to react very quickly to events and announcements – more often we get good warning of what is coming up. Because the Government has no majority in the Lords there is much discussion, and usually agreement, between the Parties over planning the handling of our business. In the Commons (where I was previously part of the “Usual Channels”) most of the programme was effectively imposed by the Government’s “business managers”.
So yesterday’s debate about planning and architecture was foreshadowed some weeks ahead. In between two TV interviews about LordsoftheBlog I had time to prepare a short contribution to this debate. We also know first thing that morning what the order of speaking will be, and how long each of us will get. In the Commons, of course, only the main Party spokespersons know that they will be called by the Speaker. Backbenchers can sit for hours waiting and hoping, a polished speech in their hands, and never get to make it. On the whole, although perhaps Peers’ debates may be too predictable, with little inter-action between speakers, we probably have more interesting discussions. Judge for yourself by reading Hansard for our debate (it’s not too long!)
Another regular query has come up after (Baroness) Frances d’Souza and I had to appear on the windswept green space opposite the House of Lords for a TV interview. There is absolutely no reason why we could not avoid the wind and rain by using a space within the building, with a screen behind us to show the Lords (or Commons) in session behind us. That way we could demonstrate a working democracy, rather than a historic relic. I have even discovered the perfect space, with more than a dozen long redundant telephone boxes and plenty of room for a much more accessible studio. Meanwhile, Lord Norton and I were interviewed yesterday in the Peers Lobby, immediately outside the Chamber, but that was unusual.
Unfortunately the broadcasters are often too lazy to spend time coming through security into the building, and the Commons authorities are still too lazy about releasing unused space, even for such a vital communication purpose as this!
The Peers are revolting !!
Sorry, it’s an old line, but grabbing the front page of the Independent does give out a message about your work..
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/asylum-the-peers-revolt-801745.html
Is there any real advantage in knowing about the business in advance ?
If you are anything like me I would leave the preparation until the last moment anyway. Some people call this ‘procrastination’, I prefer to think of it as ‘just-in-time’ management.
The point about the Government’s ‘business managers’ is well made. I think there is a perception that the House of Lords is just some form of ‘elephant’s graveyard’ who should know their place and just accede to the will of the Commons by ‘rubber-stamping’ legislation.
A battle of wills between the two is often spun as the Lords ‘defying the democratic will of the people’, despite the fact that MPs are often under a ‘three-line-whip’ to defy their constituents views in any case.
Of course, in some cases ‘the will of the people’ needs resisting on issues such as capital punishment. But a balance is required when the level of political engagement drops very sharply due to perceived lack of Government response to huge demonstrations against the Iraq War and against ID cards.
People today are used to ‘instant response’. They hate being held in queues while travelling, or while speaking to a call-centre on the phone. If they have to spent months and years campaigning on issues close to their hearts, only to be ignored, there is little surprise that the noble Lords find the level of correspondence is quite low.
Sorry Bedd, another Guardian ref coming up, this time from La Toynbee:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/mar/28/voterapathy
Quote:
“A dismal survey from the Hansard Society published yesterday finds only 13% of voters very interested in politics. Only 51% describe themselves as at all interested, and the number is falling.”
The Hansard stats are here:
http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/blogs/parliament_and_government/archive/2008/03/27/audit5.aspx
It’s worth a look. Apparently, 58% of those with Labour-voting intentions admit to having little or no knowledge of politics. 72% of all respondents admit to having little or no knowledge of the EU (3% have never heard of it), a similar figure on the proposed reforms of the HoL (13% had not heard of them), and 74% don’t believe the gvt listens to individual members of the public.
Where to start?
tiz, It does remind me slightly of a game I played at one of these management awaydays to do with communication. You have to try and get your point across to someone who has been told to deliberately avoid making eye contact with you. It is next to impossible, because even though they can clearly hear you, your brain is telling you that they are not listening..
I’m afraid until MPs starting paying a bit more attention to feedback they are getting from the troops on the ground, trying to improve the engagement figures is likely to be a pointless exercise. The number of Lords down to speak at the debate on the Lisbon Treaty does give one some hope that the views of the wider public are being received, but let us see what comes of it..
We do not need Hansard or an obscure metrocentric newspaper to state the glaringly obvious…British people care nothing for their politicians, for very obvious reasons. The major problem now is how to kick start interest in the political process again.
This will take at least a generation, even if the house of commons came to its senses at eight AM next Monday morning.
One practical way would be to introduce compulsory voting (just listen to the howls of protest)
Unpopular it may well be but, for something as important as this, there should be no choice, it is the most important single action an individual, as part of a community, can take.
The one very important provisio should be that, included in the ballot paper would be the option to vote for..
“None of the Above”
This gives the voter the option to say “I do not agree with the policies of any of the candidates put forward at my local election, go back to the drawing board”
I have always thought that the lack of the above option made the electoral process undemocratic.
Perhaps we can learn from the Socialist Party (GB), where entry is restricted to those who can pass a test on its theory; the impossible is possible (hmmm, I think I just failed).
I do think that if we do introduce compulsory voting with a “none of the above” option, as suggested above, then if “none of the above” beats all other candidates then the position should just be left vacant until the next election. That way the smug anti-politics brigade will be treated like adults and be forced to live with their decision to have no representation.
In the interests of good planning, how does a non-peer start a blog?
Lord Tyler said:
“However, it will be difficult for us to reply to each and every one. As you may have discovered we do have other jobs to do here!”
Exactly! I would argue that replies from the Noble Lords should be the exception rather than the rule. The blog serves as a point of contact with the public to air views or just to get things off of ones chest.
Individual replies to the initial editorial is what matters as the blog in itself will not resolve anything. A reply to clarify or enhance is always a welcome addition from an owner.
May I suggest that regulars take advantage of the RSS feed on this site perhaps into Microsoft Outlook, http://www.attensa.com/ so as not to miss events as they happen.
Senex:
“Lords of the Blog is an experimental project to encourage direct dialogue between web users across the world and Members of the House of Lords.”
If that is what is printed on the tin (or, in this case, at the top of each page) then we should expect ‘direct dialogue’ with the bloggers. Dialogue is often preferred to debate when the intention is to resolve a matter but I won’t push this point.
Tiz
LadyTizzy you said:
“Lords of the Blog is an experimental project to encourage direct dialogue between web users across the world and Members of the House of Lords.”
Ok! But what can a blogger expect from the experience? If one looks at the make up of the House of Lords it comes down to appointed peers and hereditary peers. Between them there must be over a thousand years of life experience and expertise to be called upon. A veritable font of all knowledge?
However, the rules of engagement are a bit woolly. For instance should one only confine oneself to discussion of the editorial by the Noble Lord or Lady or interject with a tangent related to say current affairs?
For instance one might ask in light of Libdem Vince Cable’s experience at a recent PMQ in the lower house whether mentioning the Queens name at all is bad form in both upper and lower houses?
A nice to have under menu ‘The Authors’ would be the political affiliation next to the peer. For example Lord (Clive) Soley [Labour], Lord (Ralph) Lucas of Crudwell and Dingwall [Hereditary] and so on.
Whilst the know how in the house is extensive there must be gaps? I will wager there is no astrophysicist in the house nor is there a plate tectonics expert. The point I’m making is that the peer should be given the option to express a range of areas of expertise that they would feel comfortable with in their mini profile? This is especially so for the hereditary peers.
Some of the anecdotal material that occurs in the house should be reported too because its so very funny. For example, in the debate on grain prices one is minded of the comment by one peer of what would happen if every China man ate one chicken per week and what it would do to the price of grain. Well! I found it funny. It levels things off a bit.
And of course I would be the first to comment in an ‘Any More Bright Ideas’ section of the blog.
Senex: Go to Hansard and type ‘Marmite’ in the search facility. That, surely, has to be the marque they should all aspire to hit…
Duh! Forgive my Americanese but what search facility?
http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/
Perhaps a URL link to your reference might not be too much to ask? Given that Mmmm! Marmite, has many references within the tomes of Hansard.
I see what you mean! I use http://www.publications.parliament.uk/ as my preferred gateway for Parliamentary records.
I checked out mmmmm marmite – nothing returned. Marmite on its own works fine. ‘mmm’ is the preferred recorded spelling, similarly ‘hmmm’.
‘mmm vaz’ or ‘mmm blair’ produce fine examples that could be chewed over with your soldiers.
Tiz
Lady in a Tizzy:
You are of course yoking! May I toast to you on conceding a point?
Oh dear, no, I was merely empathising, then spreading (thinly) my findings.