We will have a new system in place in the new Parliament.  The House has already agreed, without a vote, the franework of the new regime.  However, we also need to do more to restore public trust.  We have suffered from the “if one’s at it, there are all at it” syndrome.  However vacuous the mentality, such comments stick. 

We need to develop our links with the public.  We have already made progress.  We have to build on that.  We await a debate on the Information Committee’s report on Are the Lords Listening? Creating connections between people and Parliament.   I hope that takes place soon.  I also believe that, linked to enhancing that connection, we need to strengthen our capacity to fulfil our tasks of examing Bills in detail and calling government to account.   In my view, we already do a good job – there is evidence that the public also think so - but we can always do better.  I have been successful in the ballot for debates, so have a debate on 25 February “to call attention to the case for enhancing the means available to the House of Lords to scrutinise legislation and public policy”.   This will be an opportunity to identify changes that can be made to strengthen the House.  The House is not averse to changes designed to enable it to do its job better and I detect that there is a groundswell of support for such change.

If readers have any suggestions for how the House can be more effective in carrying out its tasks, please feel free to share them.  I and like-minded colleagues have already discussed what may be done, but we are keen to hear what others think.

After all the dreadful stories in the past months about Parliament, I’m very pleased to bring you a piece of good news today! As many of you will know, our Information Committee has been carrying out an inquiry into how the House of Lords and Parliament as a whole can engage with the public and enable members of the public to communicate with it. And today we publish our report Are the Lords listening? Creating connections between people and Parliament

I give an overview of the report’s contents in a short YouTube video.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzeM9ENwrGE]

I’d like to thank all of you who have contributed to make this possible. We received a large number of written submissions, YouTube videos, comments on our web forum and comments in response to my earlier blogs. All of the comments were considered by the Committee and helped to shape our deliberations. So I hope that you’ll take some time to read our report. If you do, you’ll see how much of what we say was shaped by what others said to us. I hope that you’ll read it and think – yes, the Lords do listen.

Tim Renton

Since we started in March we’ve received many many comments from people. We’re now having a one hour debate in the Lords this coming Tuesday evening, 16 June, on this subject. The following day, the full Committee will meet to discuss the contents of the Report on our Inquiry, which we plan to publish in July.

You may have seen all that has been put to the Committee already. This is a chance for you to send us any further comments, ahead of our debate in the Chamber – either on this blog or responding to my YouTube video.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZkUa5Woq1eU]

I will forward your comments to all the Members who will be participating in the debate.

We want to hear from as many interested members of the public as possible before we come to recommendations and conclusions.

Thank you very much for your interest.

Tim Renton

I attended the Constitution Committee in the morning (a briefing meeting for our inquiry into the Cabinet Office) but had to leave early and cross the corridor to the meeting of the Lords Information Committee.  The committee was taking evidence from four journalists (David Hencke of The Guardian, Jason Beattie of The Mirror, Peter Riddell of The Times, and John Hipwood of the Wolverhampton Express and Star) and then from me.  A video of the session can be found here.  The journalists were very helpful; they stressed the value of targeting specialist and local media and of providing the press gallery with details of the specialist interest of peers. 

I had already made a written submission and the questions focused on my recommendations in that.  In my evidence, I stressed the importance of increasing resources, of targeting audiences (not treating ‘the public’  as some homogeneous whole), and of putting over not only the positive features of the House (as opposed to appearing overly defensive) but also putting with greater clarity the core functions of the House.   In this respect, I drew on this blog.  I mentioned a response to my earlier post on the re-designed website.  I quoted the comment of howridiculous that the home page appeared to be ‘too fussy’.    There is the danger of us providing too much  detail on the specifics of what we do and losing sight of explaining in simple terms what we are about.

The committee has already taken evidence from a range of witnesses, including pupils from a number of schools, and continues to welcome submissions.  Its web forum will remain open until 21 May.

The home page also links to the online forum for the Lords’ Information Committee’s inquiry into ‘People and Parliament’.

Lord Renton, House of Lords Information Committee

When does a Blogger, talking about himself, turn into an Inquisitor asking lots of questions?  That is what I want to become.

The Lords Information Committee, of which I am the proud chairman, is starting an inquiry this week in which we want to find out your thoughts about Parliament in general and the House of Lords in particular. We are calling it “People and Parliament”.

We are asking straightforward questions that we hope you will want to answer.

Parliament is, after all, the place where laws are decided and the long-term future of the UK is changed.

So:

• How could the House of Lords improve public understanding of its work?
• How could the House of Lords increase people’s interest in its work and Members?
• How could the House of Lords best enable people to interact with it?

We’re also particularly interested in hearing the views of young people and how they view the House of Lords.

Take part in our eConsultation, follow our inquiry on Twitter and come back to us with your comments. We will listen and learn.

In addition to the eConsultation, which is aimed at the general public, the Information Committee is also asking more detailed questions about online communication and engagement. The questions can be found in the Information Committee’s call for evidence.

Please also watch our YouTube video -  we would like you to post video responses to this film (via Parliament’s YouTube channel (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnPWORmLZF8) suggesting how we can improve understanding of the work and role of the House of Lords.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnPWORmLZF8]

Tim Renton

The debate on enhancing Parliament’s ability to communicate with the public was held yesterday.  What was remarkable was the number of peers who contributed, not least given that it was the last debate before we rose for Christmas.  I gather it was the best supported debate prior to the Christmas recess since we began using Thursdays as our general debate days. 

What was also notable was the extent to which Lords of the Blog was mentioned.   Guest blogger Lord Renton quoted some of the responses he received.  The Chairman of Committees, Lord Brabazon, in replying to the debate, mentioned those who had responded to my earlier post on the subject.  Bloggers Lords Soley and Tyler contributed and Baroness d’Souza was present for the entire debate.

I stressed the importance of seeing communication as a two-way process.  Having strengthened our means of communicating with the public, it is important to focus on how members of the public can communicate with us.   I suggested various ways of enhancing both parts of the process – some of these will be familiar to readers, not least those who responded to my earlier post.  All those speaking made some excellent and complementary suggestions.  Recognition of the need to build on what both Houses have already done was a core theme of the debate. 

One particularly constructive proposal came from Lord Renton.  He said that he would recommend to the Information Committee in the New Year that it undertake an inquiry into Parliament and the public.   As and when it gets under way, it will be inviting input from all those with an interest.  I will keep you posted.