Press Releases

The House of Commons can’t fix broken politics, only the public can, argues ippr

Email this to a friend Print Delicious Digg Facebook Reddit

15 May 2009

ippr argues politics in Britain is broken. Fixing the rules on expenses is not enough to restore faith in politics
The think tank calls for root and branch reform of our political system to close the gap between the public and politics with a Citizens’ Assembly introduced to propose reforms.

Responding to today’s speech by Speaker of the House of Commons Michael Martin, amid growing calls for him to quit over his handling of the expenses furore, leading independent think tank the Institute for Public Policy Research (ippr) outlines a set of clear principles needed to radically overhaul the MPs pay and expenses system, arguing that reforms cannot come from the Speaker or MPs but must be driven by the public, if confidence in democracy is to be restored.

ippr sets out key principles needed to radically reform the current system of MP’s pay and expenses essential in restoring public confidence. In addition to MPs repaying, as many are now doing, the most offensive claims, ippr argues that:

1. MPs have lost the moral authority to set their own pay, pensions and allowances. These should be set and policed by an independent watchdog. MPs’ pay should be benchmarked against comparable public sector professions.

2. The system must be transparent. What MPs spend public money on should be published on the internet so that constituents are able to hold their representatives to account. All positions in MPs’ offices should be externally and publicly advertised.

3. Allowances and expenses should only be paid to the extent that they are essential for MPs to carry out their public duties. MPs should not be allowed to profit privately at the public’s expense.

This means that the second homes allowance should be abolished and MPs should be given a flat rate allowance to rent a flat in London or their constituency. Alternatively, parliament should purchase a number of flats which could be used rent free by MPs as their second homes.
There should be a modest allowance to furnish a rented flat, which will be capped to prevent extravagant purchases at the publics’ expense.
There should no allowances for food, which MPs should purchase from their basic salary like everyone else.
Transport costs should be covered.

Lisa Harker, Co-Director of ippr said: “Public trust in our political system has been weakening gradually for years – it has now collapsed. Nothing short of root and branch reform will repair it.

“Members of Parliament have been caught red handed using taxpayers’ money to pay for moats, patio heaters and property development, with many claims as farcical as they are shameless. If confidence in democracy is to be restored then radical reform to our political system must be driven by the public, rather than the political classes.

“Despite everything we have witnessed in recent weeks, politics remains a good thing. But our political system needs to be reconnected with the public it is supposed to serve.”

Our political system needs root and branch reform

Politics in Britain is broken. Fixing the political system not only requires comprehensive reform of MPs expenses, it demands root and branch reform of our political institutions. The current crisis presents a historic opportunity to achieve this. It is incumbent on all political parties to urgently re-ignite democratic renewal.

ippr argues that Parliament legislate to establish a Citizens' Assembly which would be tasked with reviewing the political system and making recommendations on how it should be reformed in order to restore trust in politics. The Assembly would report to Parliament which would be expected to implement its proposals. It should also be empowered to recommend that specific reforms be put to the voters in the form of a referendum.

The Citizens' Assembly should look at the following aspects of the political system:

The effectiveness of the electoral system to represent the public
The balance of power between central and local government
Reform of Parliament (including for example, the composition of the Lords, and the power of select committees)
The way politics is financed, and the case for state funding
Measures designed to redistribute power to the public and enhance citizen participation in the political process, including wider use of referenda and citizens’ juries
Proposals to open up new routes into politics, such as through the introduction of ‘primaries’, which would allow local electorates to select candidate
Options for improving the accountability of elected representatives, including a public right to recall MPs and force fresh elections

Lisa Harker, Co-Director of ippr said: “The constitution does not belong to the political class it belongs to the people. The time has come to hand over real power to the people so that they can determine how they would like to be governed.

“Reform must be driven by the people themselves. It has, long been recognised that party interest has always stood in the way of achieving far-reaching constitutional reform, hence the endless delays over Lords reform, party funding and electoral reform.

“As well as devising new rules for expenses that are administered by an external body, we should: look hard at ways of promoting a wider set of routes into politics (including the use of primaries and other ways of breaking the power of local party electorates); consider how to ensure that our representatives are more attuned to the ethos of public service; and demand that our political parties to come up with proposals to reconnect with the outlooks and experiences of society outside Westminster.”

Notes to editors

A Citizens’ Assembly is a body of ordinary citizens selected by lot, like a jury, which is brought together to consider major political issues. The best example comes from Canada, where in 2003 the prime minister of British Columbia acted on an election pledge and set up an inquiry on the voting system staffed by 160 ordinary citizens, appointed by lot.

The British Columbia experiment shows that citizens are more than capable of picking their way through difficult policy issues. Having reviewed all the various options, the assembly proposed a well-argued recommendation for proportional representation. In the referendum that followed, their choice was endorsed by some 58% - only 2% short of the 60% needed to change the system.

Citizens' assemblies on the Canadian model possess what referenda, and much of Britain's representative system, so conspicuously lacks - a deliberative dimension. They give citizens involved in them a chance to get to grips with an issue. Their recommendations are informed and considered, rather than knee jerk.

Importantly they provide a way of breaking the log jam on political reform, which tends to get blocked because the political parties with a vested interest in the existing system do not support change. This has been shown most recently in Britain in the failure to reform political party funding, MPs’ expenses, the House of Lords and the electoral system.

Under ippr’s proposal an assembly of 150-200 ordinary citizens would:

Sit for 18 months and initiate a national conversation on how to reform our political institutions
Take evidence at ‘town hall’ meetings around the country and from a range of different civic, social and political groups
Recommend a number of options for reform in areas such as political party funding and the electoral system.
Some of these may be so fundamental that they should be put to the wider public in a referendum, others should be considered by parliament. Although there can be no legal obligation on parliament to accept the recommendations, it would be politically difficult for parliament to ignore them and there should be an understanding that parliament would act.

Contact

Kelly O'Sullivan ippr media officer, 020 7470 6125 / 07753 719 289 / k.osullivan@ippr.org