In response to my earlier post on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, Bedd Gelert made some suggestions as to how the House of Lords might increase its media profile. I have responded to his comments but I thought it may be helpful to reproduce my response here. He mentions that there is merit in not attracting a lot of attention but there may be a case for inviting sketch-writers to pay more attention to what we are doing.
I agree that there are advantages to having a low media profile. Much of the work we do is not of obvious interest to the general public: debating clause 98 of the Agriculture (Miscellaneous Provisions)(No. 2) Bill is not likely to be of great interest outside the House (or indeed to many in the House). Limited or non-existent media attention means that it is easier than in the Commons to have an informed discourse with ministers, the ministers knowing that any concession they may make is not going to be splashed across the media as a Government U-turn. If we got too much media coverage, it may encourage ministers to take a more defensive stand.
There are, though, occasions when the House does discuss issues that do excite the interest of the public: Lord Joffe’s Assisted Dying Bill is a good example. That is when it is quite legitimate for debate to attract wider attention. Lord Joffe’s Bill certainly attracted a lot of letter writing by people, both for and against the Bill. Given that, I was surprised that I did not receive more letters than I did on the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill. That could, of course, be a consequence of limited media attention.
We do, very occasionally, attract the attention of the sketch-writers. Matthew Parris is no longer a sketch-writer but did, on the odd occasion, come over to cover the House. He did a particularly good sketch once based on giving people titles based on what they wear. However, it is difficult to compete with the Commons, in part because most senior ministers sit in the Commons (and people know who they are – well some of them anyway) and people have generally heard of some of the back-bench MPs (Dennis Skinner and the like). It is a bit of a Catch 22 situation for the Lords. Sketch-writers do not cover us because people outside do not know who we are, and people outside are only likely to know who we are once sketch-writers and others do report who we are and what we are doing.
It is not helped by the fact that when there is some media coverage, the level of factual knowledge displayed is not always of the highest quality. The Times once illustrated a story on the Lords with a picture of people wearing robes, clearly assuming they were Lords. They were senior judges. Judges wear wigs. Lords do not.
If you subscribe to the principle of “live by the media, die by the media” then it may be a slippery slope to nowhere, naturally if you feel that greater media coverage would benefit your work then you have little choice, obviously media handling has now become a separate discipline and requires so called experts, the worst example would be the emergence of the Max Clifford’s of this world. I am sure that no one would wish to become involved with an Alastair Campbell type!
That being said if I wished for anyone to write about me then Parris would be the one, witty, well informed and nearly always right.
Will you have to walk a fine line, will most of your working day be spent weaving an attack / defence strategy (think of today’s nulabours every waking moment,) barrage balloons up, 88mm’s loaded and pointed at the skies, frightened to step out of their front doors, knowing they are doomed, hoisted by their own petard, they chose to bed with the media, I would say that they regret it.
The first question to be addressed is whether you prefer to attract the media or the rest of us. Undoubtedly, MPs need the media but does the HoL?
It is unfortunate that the media, and this gvt in particular, appear to have contrived to make the whole of the HoL seem a cushy number and a reward for knowing the right people, without first looking in the mirror.
Next question is whether the peers are more keen to get their work recognised, or to promote the general work of the HoL.
It is most unlikely that most people will know who Dennis Skinner is, and I doubt whether more than 40% of his constituents would be able to pick him out in a line-up. I have no idea what he has achieved but know him for his one-liners at the State Opening of Parliament.
The day-to-day work of the HoC is largely ignored by most, including the MPs themselves. The gvt is a different matter.
Tiz