Should we scrap EDMs?

Just had this email through, from a campaign to scrap parliamentary Early Day Motions.

It's a point that has occurred to me in recent times, although some constituents and organisations place great importance on whether or not their MP signs up to an EDM, as a sort of public 'nailing your colours to the mast'. In the days when I could sign EDMs, constituents would be delighted that I'd signed up to something on, say, an animal welfare issue or something in support of one of the many health campaigns (Cardiac Risk in the Young, or Breakthrough Breastcancer, for example). It was also a useful way of demonstrating support for events such as Carers Week, and in doing so flagging it up a bit higher on the political agenda.

EDMs can also be influential in persuading MPs to vote one way or another when actual legislation comes forward, in that it makes it more difficult for an MP to backtrack on their position, hence the CWU's relentless drive to get as many as MPs as possible to sign up to the Royal Mail EDM. On the other hand, I suspect many MPs sign them just for a quiet life, just because someone has asked them to do so. And - as befits a mechanism often described as 'parliamentary grafitti' - they can sometimes stay around long after an MP has changed his or her mind on an issue, or the facts surrounding an issue have changed so as to make the original motion obsolete. MPs are then accused of back-tracking or U-turning, when it could be that they've just had more of an opportunity to look into the facts and have discovered it wasn't so simple as it first seemed.

Anyway, time to go and vote. Here's the text of the email:

"There is much talk about reforming democracy and making Parliament both more effective and more efficient. One area where reform could show a real cost saving without damaging the effectiveness of the role of an MP or the role of the House of Commons would be through abolishing Early Day Motions. It is estimated that the cost of an Early Day motion is £300 each. Indeed according to a House of Commons factsheet, "The printing and publication costs associated with early day motions in financial year 2005/06 were approximately £627,000." In this day and age, there are easier and more cost effective ways for elected representatives to raise an issue of concern, or generate some local publicity for an issue they care about. We are contacting all Members of Parliament and asking them if they support a proposal to abolish Early Day Motions. We would be extremely grateful if you could let us know your thoughts on this matter.

Best wishes, Scrap EDM's"

Last word on whipping for tonight

I haven't ever seen or read House of Cards, but it's now on my 'must do' list so I can learn just when it's appropriate to push fellow politicians off the top of tall buildings and when I should resort to other, less draconian methods.

I've also been advised to get hold of a copy of Gyles Brandeth's book on his time as an MP and whip. Apparently it was common practice in the Tory Whips' office to start the morning meeting with a glass of champagne! I can categorically confirm that it doesn't happen in the Labour ranks.

More on whipping

The key misconception about the role of the Whips office is that it's all about forcing people to do what they don't want to do (i.e. to vote with the party, not against it). OK, so the job of the whips is to get Government business through the House. but more often than not this is about the simple task of making sure enough MPs are present to vote. Each whip has particular responsibilities. I'm the South West whip, which means I look after backbenchers in the South West region (all seven of them, so I get off lightly!) I also have departmental responsibilities, for No. 10, DFID and the Northern Ireland office.

If those backbenchers or Ministers in those departments want to miss a vote, they have to ask me if they can be 'slipped'. For example, if Shaun Woodward or Paul Goggins want to be in Stormont, they have to clear this with the whip. The final say goes to the all-powerful pairing whip. Until recently the post was occupied by the formidable Tommy McAvoy, but he's now been promoted to Deputy Chief Whip, and now it's Tony Cunningham's job. He has to make sure we have the numbers to get legislation through, whilst taking into account MPs' other commitments. What's more important, for example - a Minister wanting to travel to Brussels for a meeting of his/ her EU counterparts, or a backbench MP wanting to attend the funeral of a long-serving councillor back in the constituency? Someone wanting to attend the opening of a local Children's Centre, or someone wanting to go on an overseas Select Committee visit? And then there's the issue of whether to call in those who are sick, or on maternity leave or compassionate leave, depending on how tight the vote is likely to be. Then there's a judgment call to be made as to whether certain MPs (former Cabinet ministers in particular, and some of the old-stagers) are likely to hang around for the 10pm votes - and not much can be done to stop them if they don't want to.

Finally, there's the issue of rebellions. How many Labour MPs are likely to vote against the Government? How many are likely to abstain? This is where what some would refer to as the whips' "dark arts" come into play. A whip needs to know what backbenchers are thinking and feeling and planning on doing. But this is as much about having a good relationship with those MPs, and having a two-way conversation. If an MP has concerns about a particular piece of legislation it's far better to arrange for them to talk to a Minister, and see if consensus can be reached before the issue comes to a vote. Either the backbencher's concerns will be allayed, or the Minister will concede a point. And on some occasions appeals to the backbencher's loyalty might be made, of course, which is what people commonly perceive to be the Whips' role, the so-called arm-twisting.

As for the little black book rumoured to exist somewhere in the Whips' office, containing everyone's darkest secrets... it doesn't exist. It is actually quite important for a whip to know something of what is going on in the lives of 'their MPs', but not for blackmail purposes! If an MP has a health problem, or a parent or partner who is seriously ill, or problems with their local party, or whatever, it's useful to know so that MPs can be supported, and allowances made, for example in not putting them on big Bill committees or 'slipping' them from late votes. So actually we're quite cuddly really. Our job is to look after MPs. To befriend them. Honestly!

Whip it!

As Devo once said. Whip it, whip it good. OK, so I'm now a Government whip and yes, I am already fed up with the jokes. Contrary to mischevious rumour and speculation, that does not mean I'm not allowed to blog or Twitter or otherwise cease to be a normally-functioning human being (if a politician could ever be described thus, which I doubt). The Chief Whip did actually give me permission to blog about what goes on at whips meetings 'so long as you make it all up'. So that's alright then.

I got the call from Nick Brown on Tuesday morning as I was heading for the Immigration Bill Committee. Hadn't actually given much thought to the prospects of being 'shuffled' till then; too much else on my plate, and the phone wasn't working so couldn't sit there gazing at it longingly hoping it would ring, as we lowly backbenchers are meant to do at reshuffle time. But I said yes, and then had to sit in Bill Committee for two-and-a-half hours wondering what it would all mean.

The starting point is that as a whip, you're officially part of the Government. As a PPS you're kind of halfway - you are part of your particular ministerial team, and therefore not allowed to ask Qs or speak in debates on matters relevant to that department, and you're not supposed to sign Early Day Motions calling on the Government to do something or other, but otherwise you are able to act like an ordinary backbencher. Once you become a whip, all that goes out of the window. You can't speak in any debates, ask written or oral questions, sign EDMs, sit on a Select Committee or be an officer of an All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG). Which basically rules out rather a lot of what I would normally do.

Usually I'd be looking through the Order of Business, seeing whether there are any questions I'd want to come in on, or any debates I'd want to intervene in. I'd be thinking what questions to table, and whether to ask for an adjournment debate on an issue. And I'd also spend a fair amount of time involved in my APPGs, as Chair of the Credit Union APPG, Secretary of the Somaliland APPG and Vice-Chair of the Wholesale Financial Markets Group. (An eclectic mix of topics!)

I'd also recently been appointed to the South West Regional Select Committe, and we'd had our first 'offsite' meeting on Monday, in Swindon at the Steam Railway Museum. (I had to do a radio interview while I was there, and ended up hiding in a broom cupboard as that was the only place you couldn't hear the sound of a steam train whistle every few minutes. But that's another story). I've now got to come off the Committee, but will still be taking an interest in the APPGs, just not as an officer.

Of course, as I always tell people, much of an MP's influence isn't exercised in public ways. It's as much about writing to Ministers, or having meetings with them, or collaring them in the division lobby as it is about asking questions or getting into debates in the House. Questions are actually a rather crude, though important, device in getting an item onto the political agenda. They usually have to be followed up in some other way. The challenge now will not so much be about how I get across constituents' views or raise issues with the powers-that-be, as there are still plenty of ways to do that, but more how I demonstrate to constituents that my silence in the Chamber doesn't mean I'm not speaking up for them. Glad I managed to get in the debate on livestock's impact on the environment before my promotion, and a prisoners' families debate, as those were the two issues I felt no-one else was prepared to raise. Bit disappointed I won't be able to speak in the Child Poverty Bill Second Reading, which is coming up very soon, or serve on the Committee, but will definitely still be taking an interest.

So - that's what a whip can't do. Next post will be about what a whip does do.

Potholes and Parliament

For various complicated reasons I am neither at my constituency home or London home this weekend (mostly connected with wanting to be near Harefield hospital, nothing more exciting than that). I've been sleeping on a blow-up mattress which has semi-deflated by the time morning comes, wearing someone's padded check shirt to keep warm. My mobile phone battery has gone, and apparently so have the front springs on the suspension of my Smart Car Roadster. Which explains why it's been driving like an old jalopy for the past few months - I'd blamed it on the arrival of the new Lib Dem adminstration on Bristol City Council, envisaging them sending out crack squads to create potholes in the road just so they could take the credit for fixing them. (And of course to provide the essential backdrop for the all-important election leaflet 'standing pointing at potholes with a deeply wounded expression on your face' photos).

Anyway, onto more serious matters.... And time for yet another confession from me. Since I was elected in 2005 I've paid little attention to what could be termed the 'back office' side of Parliament. I always thought that MPs who banged on about parliamentary process, who sat on things like the Administation Committee, who knew and cared what the Serjeant-at-Arms did or why we have a person called Black Rod and what he does when he's not banging on the Chamber door once a year, had, frankly, 'gone native'. They were the parliamentary equivalent of members of the school council or the Junior Common Room; necessary, I suppose, but I couldn't understand why they'd gone to the bother of standing for parliament only to spend their time in committee debating the pressing issue of whether spotted dick should remain on the menu in the Members' Dining Room.

Basically I learned what I needed to learn about parliamentary procedure - how to tell what you're voting on and when, how to table an amendment, what a programme motion is, what's a valid point of order - without bothering too much about the rest. I worked on the assumption that someone else was taking care of things, whether it be Sir this and Sir that from the Tory benches, or the old hands on the Labour side who delighted in such matters, or the Palace of Westminster staff who were employed to make sure the cogs and wheels turned behind the stage curtains, enabling us politicians to take our place in the spotlight and do the serious stuff.

The events of the past year or so, from the Damian Green affair to MPs' expenses have however been the equivalent of the stage curtain being accidentally raised in the middle of Act Two. Or like the Wizard of Oz when his curtain is pulled back by Toto.

I think many of us though, particularly the newer MPs who had come into Parliament to pursue causes they cared passionately about, or took very seriously the job of representing their constituents, still didn't pay that much attention when the FOI requests were put in, or when David Maclean put forward his private member's bill to exempt MPs from it, or when the Speaker made various rulings. It wasn't real politics, it was process. It wasn't what we came into politics for.

But recent events have convinced me however, that those of us who just kind of went along with it were wrong to do so. Much as I would like to just get in and drive my car without caring about the front suspension springs (or in the case of the previous one, without putting my mind to the trivial issue of whether it needed oil and water, which is what killed it), the fact is - you can't drive without a sound vehicle. And Parliament at the moment is not a sound vehicle. (Tempting though it would be to labour this metaphor even further by talking about Nick Clegg's criticism of the Speaker as being akin to standing in the road pointing at a pothole, I won't...)

My feeling at the moment is that it looks as if it's going to be us, those politicians who haven't taken much of an interest till now, the younger generation, who will have to step up to the mark on this. We need to sort Parliament out. I just hope it's not too late to do so.