I had a meeting earlier this evening with fellow bloggers to discuss how to the build on the success of Lords of the Blog. We have been impressed by the interest the blog has attracted and by the quality of the comments made by readers.
We considered a number of ideas for adding to the appeal of the blog, including increasing the number of peers who contribute. However, we are conscious that what really matter are the views of our readers. Do you have suggestions as to how we might build on what we have done so far? Are there any changes that you would like to see?
All comments are very welcome. We would hope to implement changes in the near future. We are approaching our first anniversary, so it would be good to implement changes to coincide with our second year of blogging.
I love the blog, I find it so informative and yet informal. I enjoy the history, I suppose I would like a further exploration of the evolution of the House. The impact of Europe, impact of Supreme Court, impact of constitutional reform. We hear a lot from people outside the House on how best to take forward reform, but less from within the House – maybe that is just me 🙂 I would love to know more about the benefits of the current system and how the Lords themselves would see evolution?
I would also love it as a public law student (!) if you gave your thoughts on what we should be thinking about for the future in terms of Human Rights, Pariamentary systems.
Hope this helps from a loyal follower
Could someone from the upper house please explain why the showing of Fitna was cancelled due to pressure from “Muslim” groups? Do any other peers think that it is reprehensible that Lord Ahmed should be able to squash debate over what is increasingly a problem of some concern – the Islamification of Europe and the UK?
Lord Ahmed would no doubt happily repeat the mantra that Islam is the religion of peace. There are plenty of ex-Muslims who will take issue with him for this claim. Showing Fitna to the upper house was intended to stimulate debate – so either the Lords are prepared to accept the religion of peace notion without argument, or they simply don’t care about the effects of Islamification is having our culture. In both cases peers would be very misguided.
I understand that the Commons does not have the courage to discuss such an issue, but I am very disappointed that the Lords have retreated from doing so.
Lord Norton,
Meeting a few lords in person would be pretty interesting, though I guess it would be impossible given the numbers on the blog.
I rather enjoy it as it is – particularly some of the behind the scenes tales of your working day (the political quizzes sometimes go rather over my head!)
I like the blog. Do any of the remaining hereditary peers post? I’d be very interested in their views on the House and its future.
Raveem.
This blog is great and shows and explains why the house of lords is a very good second chamber and should be left alone from reformist like Lord Tyler! I would like to hear from the senior members of the House of Lords the old school players such as Baroness Carnegy of Lour and Baroness Trumpington. Can I also ask in a division do peers walk down the content and non content lobby’s in opposite direction. I.e the content lobby you enter by the throne walk down towards the commons while the Not content lobby you enter by the bar of the house and walk up towards the throne. Do the clerks have a desk to tick peers off on as in the commons?
‘Lords of the Podcast’, anyone?
Personally, I would like to see some more debate-generating, essay-like posts, although this may just reflect my own bias in what I like to read.
***
JJWS, it was deplorable that muslim groups (and Lord Ahmed) were able to get Fitna removed from the Lords. It was an assault on free-speech which should not have happened.
However, I take issue with your conspiracy-theory that Europe is being ‘Islamoficated’ in anyway. This idea is based on distored facts and xenophobia.
Thanks for asking for our views!
I can see the point of getting more peers to blog but it has a downside: I don’t think I have time to read many more articles than appear at present so if more peers means more articles then I would need to stop watching the blog as a whole and start only looking at particular peers who regularly blog on subjects of the most importance to me (or maybe you could arrange feeds by subject or something). That would be a shame as I find the general articles, the history, the day-in-the-life articles, etc to be interesting as well — and I have learnt a massive amount about the Lords (and changed my views) during the last year. These articles are the ones that educate us on the Lords and hence are the ones you should be trying to make sure that even single-issue political readers are seeing!
But if more peers blog with the same number of articles then who do we hear less from? All hard questions.
BTW, I like Anna Farmery’s suggestions for topics — great list.
I think that as the cross-benchers are the least understood of the house groupings so a representative sample (as they don’t have a coherence of viewpoint that the other groupings do) would be a huge benefit. I agree as above an HP perspective, particularly on reform issues, would be nice. Perhaps for those peers who can’t contribute on a regular basis it might be nice if on particular public issues they might make one off statements. (as per the 42 days where the public would have an increased interest.)
I think I’d also welcome posts by very new peers finding their feet, those with experience of other chambers (esp non Westminster) about their views of the systems. The BBC parliament channel did a very short programme ‘peers in parliaments’ (or similar) including Lord Selkirk (MP/MSP/Peer) which was quite interesting very much as the above.
My request for change is a technical one so I’m not sure if it’s within your power. The one thing that annoys me about the Lord of the Blog blog is the fact that the URL at the top never changes. On other sites if I clicked on the comments section the URL would change to reflect that. The practical effect of that is that I can’t use the back button to get to the previous page, as it’s all the same URL, and, if I were to do that, I would end up on the page that I was viewing prior to coming here.
Tory Boy, I can answer the lobby question. Yes you’re right. The ‘Contents’ progress through the Lobby from the left of the Throne south towards the Commons and the ‘Not Contents’ go though the lobby from behind the Bar (that’s a rail folks not the place we drink) north towards the throne. Each lobby has two peers (one from each side of the House appointed in advance) acting as tellers with a numerical counter to press and a rod about 50cm long to mark people as they go by. A clerk sits at the end of each lobby ticking off our names on a register. So now you know. And to my mind charming old custom it may be but electronic voting from the floor of the Chamber as in most Council chambers would be just as fine and twice as quick. But of course that would require all peers voting to be in their seats for the debate. Our way political party members do not need to know what they are voting for, they can chase across the house in the eight minutes and get through the lobby without understanding anything about the vote. Convenient but not admirable in my view.
Ah, must go, time for our Cross-benchers meeting and the Second Reading of the Health Bill this afternoon.
Troika, there is a parliament podcast channel but the podcasts haven’t been updated since August 2008. The directly link was posted in this blog around that time.
If you’re using iTunes then just search for “parliament” with podcasts only selected on the iTunes store.
I also love the blog. I have been visiting the Lords (sitting in the visitors gallery) since I was 22. now I am 50 and have sometimes been lucky enough to be entertained to tea or even a drink by a peer now and again. My most exciting time was sitting the entire lenght of the hunting bill from start to finnish, I was desperate to go to the loo but would not leave my place as I was so enthrolled. So I encourage this blog to continue.
I have so enjoyed the House of Lords. My visits and the whole procedure of the House is so so very interesting. The speaches are great and so much better than the other place.Some times I can walk straight in without having to wait, unlike that other place where people will wait for hours.
So dear Lords and Ladies, keep blogging…………. only wish I could blog with you
With kind regards to you all
Patrick Walesby
walesby@walesby.com
Baroness Murphy as someone who has worked for an mp and been round the lords with a member, I have to say I love our division system and how it works on collecting the voices! I think it also allows members to talk to minister and sort out differences and it also allows colleagues to come together and sort out tactics. However could someone find out why the committee of the house chair has been changed from a good leather red solid chair to a desk chair on wheels I do not like it!
baronessmurphy: I take the point to an extent but I do remember on first watching the EuroParl that it reminded me of a bingo hall. The votes came at a startling rate that I doubted almost anyone but the Whips/functionaries knew anything that was being decided – I found this almost deliberate lack of time on votes rather troubling. Festina lente in voting changes.
Is there a possibility of getting members from other second chambers around the world to answer questions about their experiences?
I enjoy this blog thoroughly, and if it remained exactly the same, I believe I would continue to read it. However, I thought I would throw out some suggestions.
I would be interested in perhaps some back and forth debates between peers, particularly on issues that would not necessarily warrant debates in the House. For example, if some of the peers with historical backgrounds wished to have some discussion the historical progression of reforms of the House, that would be very interesting. I know that to some extent there is some debating, but it might be good to have it a little more often.
I agree with many others that having even more peers post would be very interesting. Furthermore, if some peers in particular, such as law lords, bishops, and even the Earl Marshal and Lord Great Chamberlain could comment (especially on their roles), it would add a great deal of insight into the blog.
I like the idea from NHackett of guest second chamber members – it would be quite fascinating to see the view from the inside of other legislatures. The occasional podcast wouldn’t go amiss either. Other than that, it’s great as it is 🙂 though how about an @lordnorton etc. twitter 😉
Some serious suggestions –
* Maybe once a week have a video of someone talking about their week in the Lords
* Possibly an audio once a week along the lines of ‘Today in Parliament’, which would be ‘podcastable’. I don’t bother with all that ‘downloading onto an MP3 Player’ myself – but it could mean people listen to the update when on the train.
* What about a monthly ‘Baroness Murphy Meets…’ interview ? Either email standard questions to Lords / Ladies etc. and print the replies.
Or more likely, for those not on email, tape an interview in the tea room and transcribe the results [of course, some may be reluctant to partake in this in the light of recent events..]
She has a pleasant ‘bedside manner’ and could surely cover matters of interest in the work of the HoL, and what noble lords do in their spare time [voluntary work, campaigns etc. ]
* ‘In The Hot Seat..’ – a victim / volunteer from outside the ‘blogging lords’ volunteers to answer questions from a selection of those submitted by readers of ‘Lords of the Blog’ on matters relating to the work of the House Of Lords and the general gossip about what goes in the place amongst those working in the Palace of Westminster.
Some slightly less serious suggestions..
* a ‘webcameron’ style video of Lord Norton doing the washing up or Baroness Murphy doing the ironing in a tawdry and rather patronising attempt to show that you are ‘one of us’ and ‘hip with the youth’.. filmed on a mobile phone for that full ‘amateur vibe’.
* a “Rogues Gallery” of miscreants, and details of their ‘Crimes and Misdemeanours’ – including stories of youthful hi-jinks
* an ‘Employee of the Month’ award for the person who has made the biggest contribution to the House of Lords in that, er, month..
* a ‘YouTube’ channel for the blogging Lords in the manner of ‘daytime television’, with panel games [Just a Minute?], light chit-chat, and a review of books, films, music and critique of what hideous attempts at musicals are on in London
I’m an American who avidly follows the blog (though I usually pass on the trivia), and I would second FinnishCowl – some more debate style posts would be interesting. I’ve noticed a little informal back and forth on the topic of reform, for example, but Lords Tyler and Norton don’t seem to directly address eachother, instead just discussing reform in general. A bit more coordination and posting their thoughts on a common proposition might be interesting. It need be nothing terribly formal, but coordinating their responses on various issues of the day might add a bit more coherence to some of the topics.
In my mind, a diversity of opinions only adds to the mental stimulation here, so more posters sounds like a great idea to me. I like the earlier suggestions on getting a good spread of roles, too, to give a fuller picture of who’s who, what their jobs are, their opinions on something in their field, etc.
If I come up with any other specific ideas, I’ll post again – for now, though, great job on this. Our system over here is more partisan, so it’s really interesting to see what experts have to say about things when they’re not beholden to a small constituency, facing re-election, or have party leadership breathing down their necks. Not that you’re immune, of course, but I think you have something going for you over there… we need some Lord Nortons over here!
Some more thoughts…
* What about ‘sexing-up’ the site slightly by having a bit of the background of other peers, or a discussion of their ‘hinterland’, as many have had interesting lives and careers prior to entering the House of Lords. Lord Ramsbotham is a case in point. Mind you, I guess several volumes of autobiography wouldn’t do him justice.
* I don’t think there would be any harm, now that the site is coming up to its first birthday of re-visiting some of the ‘How the Lords works..’ topics from the early days of the blog, which newer readers may have missed.
* Some ‘discussion topics’ on the blog may be helpful, although I don’t think it is necessary to have yet another ‘Comment Is Free’ style forum, or more of the BBC Blog talkboards. I think you need to keep your distinctive style and ‘tone of voice’ on the website.
* Without trying to generate controversy for the sake of it, I do think things like the Geert Wilders visit should be mentioned on this blog, as the nature of a blog is to try and pick up on some of the talking points, developments and debates missed by the media.
* For things like the ‘Gaza Debate’ might a link be possible to ‘web video’ coverage by BBC Parliament ? I’m not sure of the techie implications of this.
* I loathe ‘Twitter’, but maybe a box at the top of the site which says what debates are going on in the House Of Lords that day may be useful.
* Perhaps someone could be persuaded to ‘live blog’ some of the more controversial debates by sitting cross-legged on the cross-benches or those ‘sofa’ contraptions in the middle, with the wi-fi laptop sending updates out to the blogosphere as debates happen ?
Looking at comments above, many would like more peers to get involved, but they may not want to take on the technology and time commitment week in, week out.
So what about a ‘Peer of the Week’, telling us about what they would like to Stop, Start and Continue with the operation of the Lords. A sort of ‘Good, the Bad and the Ugly’ of the various processes, customs, standing orders and procedures.
What about more ‘gossip’, in the proper old sense of the word, to give us a picture of what is going in the background, with maybe some pen portraits of people contributing to debates in a particularly relevant way ?
Of course, some of this may well come across as ‘trivia’ to people like ‘AnInnocentAbroad’, and a balance would need to be struck. But as a wise American once said ‘You can’t please all of the people, all of the time..’
Many thanks for all the comments so far. Please do keep them coming.
I have been impressed both by the number and the quality of the contributions. I am pleased to report that a number are the same or similar to ideas we have been discussing. Let me try to respond to what has been suggested.
Anna Farmery: Many thanks for the suggestions, which are supported by Graham Cobb. I have made a note and will try to ensure that they are covered. They are in my area of interest, so I for one will be very happy to do posts on them.
Adrian Kidney: Your suggestion coincides with one we discussed. The idea of inviting to tea at the Lords some of those who comment on the blog in order to glean their thoughts and suggestions was something we discussed. As you indicate, it would be difficult to have a large number at the same time, but it may be possible to invite a few at a time. A round-table discussion can be extremely valuable.
Tory Boy: Baroness Murphy has already confirmed that you are spot on in your assumptions. I would add that I am totally in agreement with you (and Croft) about divisions. They have the advantages you mention. I would also add they they are useful, in both chambers, for enabling members to button-hole front-benchers (or simply enabling you to track down another member you need to see). They also to my mind emphasise the significance of the occasion. Simply pressing a button devalues the importance of casting a vote. It becomes minor and mechanical. To me, voting physically in a lobby has symbolic and substantive importance. It helps remind you of the significance of the act. It may also ensure that there are not too many votes(rendering them as some routine activity) rather than acts to be engaged in only when essential in pursuit of a point that deserves to be carried. I may also do a post on divisions: there are also other features worth commenting on.
Graham Cobb: I take your point. I don’t think we are envisaging a mass of posts by new blogging peers. We want to recruit new peers with a view to each contributing regularly, but not necessarily more than once a week or fortnight, depending on time commitments and enthusiasm.
What we have also been discussing – this ties in with points raised by Croft and Bedd Gelert – is inviting people to contribute Guest Blogs. This could also apply to the suggestion made by NHackett, supported by AJackson, of getting members from other second chambers to contribute. It could also encompass the suggestions made by Raveem, Tory Boy and FinnishCowl as to some of those we could invite to contribute. We did discuss, for example, approaching a Bishop, but I take the point about also approaching new peers, hereditaries, long-serving peers, more cross-benchers and particular office holders. We will bear these in mind in seeking to recruit more peers to contribute.
Troika21: I take the point about podcasts. As hifranc mentions, there is a parliament podcast channel – I did a post about the podcasts (I contributed to one of them, dealing with the Lords) – but nothing has been updated since last August. I will explore this further.
hifranc: On your point about the URL, I will need to take this up with our technical experts. Thanks for drawing it to my attention.
Troika21, FinnishCowl and AAnInnocentAbroad: I take your point about encouraging debate. My comments above on divisions constitute something of a response to Baroness Murphy’s contribution, so may qualify as a mini-debate! It may be that we could organise something on a more structured basis. To some extent, Lord Tyler and I have put different points about Lords reform, but there are other, perhaps more novel, topics on which some of us could have an exchange of views.
Bedd Gelert: Thanks for your various suggestions. I had thought of one or two things not dissimilar to some of your suggestions (‘An interview with…’) type of thing. I have occasionally entertained the rather radical idea of a Rogues’ Gallery, but possibly not for this site. However, I do like the idea of perhaps profiling a particular peer or event when something different occurs.
JJWS and Troika21: On the showing of Fitna, I understand it has been postponed while the situation is clarified about some comments made by Geert Wilders which may be taken as undermining free speech.
Finally, many thanks to all who have made such kind and positive comments about the blog. It’s extremely encouraging to read the comments of, among others, Patrick Walesby, Graham Cobb, AJackson, Anna Farmery, AnInnocentAbroad, Steph Gray, Raveem, Tory Boy, and FinnishCowl. We will try to enhance what we have, not get rid of it. I enjoy posting on the blog and responding to comments, so I plan to continue….
I really enjoy reading this blog. As a Dutchman that is very interested in the workings of Parliaments around the world, it gives a great insight into the workings of the House. I still have to come across a similar initiative at any other legislature.
I think it would be a great trust forwards if the are more guest blogs. In this way, we can get acquainted with more peers. For instance, I really enjoyed the guest blog of Lord Renton of Mount Harry (it lead to me buying and reading with great pleasure his brilliant book on Chief Whips).
It would also be great if the suggestion of NHackett could become reality. Getting insights in the workings of other upper chambers (the term second chamber could lead to some confusion since in The Netherlands the First Chamber is the upper chamber) would be a welcome addition to this blog. Perhaps the All Party Country Groups can provide some assistance with this.
I third and last suggestion I would like to make is that it would be a great addition if there is some more information about the committees that the House has. The do valuable work that does not always get the attention it should receive. This blog could help with that.
I would like to see a FAQ section which concerned itself with the Lords and the British Constitution and which gave historical contexts and historical examples of incidents where limits to power have been tested. I would like it to have brief readable answers with references (preferably to on-line sources) for further reading. It would also be good if it could have an occasional section which dealt in more detail with any aspect of the constitution that became topical.
I’m not rising to the one about ironing, although I do some of it. I would like to comment on the difficulties of cross discussion between peers on the blog. I enjoy reading other peers’ blogs and like many people have learnt a great deal about the House from the blog. For example, I take Lord Norton’s point about the positives about physical voting and the symbolic significance of being seen to walk through. It’s also true that one meets people in the lobbies and that can be useful. I think we take a lot of our customs for granted however and hope no-one will mind if I throw in a challenge to some of our arcane practices now and again. The most important principle is that parliamentary scrutiny should be assisted and furthered by the processes by which we discharge our responsibilities and I do not think they are always optimal.
I tend to intercede in the blog at the comment stage on some issues whereas sometimes I’d like to start a new blog about a topic raised. It is quite difficult to get a full blown conversation going on line between peers about a topic of controversy.
Baroness Murphy, Lord Norton,
A couple more light-hearted points…
I noticed in a promotional slip for ‘The Oldie’ a feature advertised called ‘I Once Met..’ – given we are all only ‘six degrees’ from anyone else on the planet, I’m sure noble Lords will have had some interesting contacts with people involved with important events.
It could be an interesting feature, along the lines of a ‘My part in his / her downfall..’ or something more historical..
The Lords are also getting some Diary coverage these days…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/feb/05/hugh-muir-diary
p.s. I doubt David Cameron does much washing-up either..
I think Earl Ferrers and Baroness Trumpington should be asked to do guest blogs.
Howridiculous.
David: Thanks for your comments. I know Lord Renton will also be very gratified by your observations – and the action you have taken as a result of his Guest Blog!
Alexander: Thanks for the suggestion. It is something we need to explore, without it becoming too academic – though, as I regularly point out, there’s nothing wrong with being academic.
Bedd Gelert: Thanks for your further suggestions. On the point about revisiting some of the topics covered earlier on the Blog, I had a feeling I already did that on occasion and essentially for the reason you give (and not because I have forgotten I have previously done something on the subject!). As for the suggestion of items along the lines of ‘I once met…’ I could do some without having to leave the Palace. There are some remarkable people in the House and it would certainly be interesting to write something about them – or, touching upon the names suggested by howridiculous, invite them to do a Guest Blog. Baroness Trumpington, I know, has some fascinating recollections about her time working at Bletchley during the Second World War.
Lord Norton
I very much appreciate the inside this blog gives into the workings of parliament. The media does not seem to do a good job there: you get too much spin and politics, but very little honest reporting. I really like the easy and matter of fact style here – thanks a lot for creating this forum.
Personally I would be interested in the stories about specific pieces of legislation, and how they work their way through the system. I have been following the immigration bill, for example, and it seems that there is some game being played there. I understand that some of the details may be confidential, but a “sports commentator style” report on the current situation may be an interesting read.
Another thing – I think as people like Iain Dale are on your ‘blogroll’ you could pester them for a bit more prominence on their list of ‘linked sites’. They might say no, but it doesn’t hurt to ask – and it is the key to ‘going viral’ in terms of reaching new readers who will spread the word more widely.
And what about trying to get on the ‘Westminster Hour’, or ‘PM’ or even Newsnight for your ‘First Anniversary’ ?
Or invite them to the House of Lords for a slice of birthday cake !!
I really enjoy the blog too. I enjoy the balance of topical posts and posts that focus on the day to day running of the Lords. I think it is important to retain the light hearted and fun element too.
It would be good to see more Members posting, particularly more women.
I think it would also be good to see more of the workings of the Lords by following something through the process, so for example legislation through its various stages or the gathering of evidence for a report through to its publication and response from the Government.
It would be good to see some of the Lords on Twitter since its all the rage these days. If they could confine themselves to 140 characters of course.
Lord Norton, You are of course right about having re-posted, or re-written, about some of the topics covered earlier on.
I guess, although this is a blog, it might be worth trying to be somewhat selective in terms of the ‘archive’ of past material, so that you have a link to information which might fall under these categories..
* ‘New Readers Start Here..’ – A sort of quick guide to the Lords
* ‘ROADMAP’ Finding your way around, Weird and Wonderful, Jargon and Language, things that someone not living in Britain would need to know to get acquainted with the place and familiar with the people and their way of working.
* ‘UHT MILK’ – most of the blog posts will not be fresh in 6 weeks – but some information has a longer ‘shelf life’ and will be worth flagging up separately on the blog under ‘process and procedure’
* ‘Part of the Furniture’ – Items about the history of the buildings and so on are unlikely to go out of date and may be worth logging separately.
I appreciate that much of this may already be covered by ‘tagging’ and you don’t want to create a ‘Wikipedia’ style cottage industry.
Sorry for posting late due to an exercise of not reading blogs vs. not reading/listening to MSM (main stream media) in another place, as some would say. Neither of us could stand it after one week.
One change that could be helpful for your audience is to make it more accessible by adding an audio version beside each post, as well as enabling the text to be made larger. See http://stuartsharpe.co.uk/2009/01/spoken-word/ (and his previous post ‘Access all areas’) and try it out. It’s free, it works, win-win.
I would prefer to see exchanges between the Peers on each other’s posts, rather than separate posts on what are, essentially, the same stories. I recognise that a new post can be effective if there are substantially different points to be made.
I’m happy to see any of the above suggestions tried out or not. You seem to know how to make a successful blog, go for what you believe will enrich the site.