Article for ConservativeHome by Henry Hill
Earlier this week, told Jack Blanchard that so-called ‘hybrid debates’
– which see MPs calling in to the House of Commons via Zoom – may
not be entirely phased out with the pandemic.
The Leader of the House suggested, plausibly enough, that such
arrangements might prove more cost-effective than creating an
entire temporary chamber as and when the renovations to the
Palace of Westminster finally go ahead.
He won’t be pleased. Virtual debates have exacerbated the
decaying quality of debate in the Commons
Ever since brought in
shorter sitting hours and programme motions, MPs who wish to
speak in popular debates have been subject to time restrictions.
Readers who have tuned in to the Commons may have seen the
Speaker announcing that contributions would be cut to four
minutes… three minutes… two minutes…
This is scarcely enough to make a substantive contribution, and
certainly not to respond to points raised by other MPs. Members
often end up simply reading out pre-prepared contributions,
creating clips for social media and clocking up their score on
They Work for You.
Even before the pandemic it was proving difficult to get some MPs
to observe the courtesy of remaining in the Chamber after
speaking. Zoom has apparently made this even worse: spared the
need to sit in the Chamber for a while before speaking – or to
come into work at all – more MPs than ever are putting in to
speak, but less indication than ever that they’re listening to
their colleagues.
Some traditionalists are concerned that MPs will get attached to
this convenience – after all, like the shorter hours introduced
by Blair it can be dressed up as ‘family friendly’ – and the
deliberative dimension of the Commons’ work will suffer yet
further.
Even if they can be weaned off it, the question remains of how to
start pushing back against truncated speeches, especially with
Parliament taking back responsibilities from the European Union
and expanding its activity in devolved areas.
One option being considered by senior parliamentarians is moving
towards something like the system used in the House of Lords,
where peers are allocated a certain number of proper
contributions. Instead of slashing the time limits for speeches,
the Speaker would instead protect speech lengths at the expense
of reducing the number of people who get to speak. The hope is
that as social media opportunities are missed and They Work for
You stats suffer, it might create backbench pressure for longer
debates – so long as the Commons authorities hold their
nerve.
Notes:
Henry Hill is an award-winning centre-right blogger and
assistant editor of ConservativeHome.
