June 2025 – PSA Parliaments

By Franklin De Vrieze.

Democratic legislatures are on the frontline of both domestic and international challenges. From executive overreach to authoritarian influence and deepening public mistrust, parliamentary institutions around the globe are under immense strain. The strengthening of parliaments therefore is both a critical safeguard for democracy and a lever for economic development and national security.

Many countries have an imbalance in the distribution of power between the different branches of government: the executive branch dominates, with legislatures left under-resourced, side-lined, or compromised. This concentration of power undermines democratic accountability and weakens institutional checks and balances. People lose faith when they perceive their parliaments as ineffective or complicit, and public trust falls. As executive dominance expands, legislatures struggle to perform their essential roles: representing the electorate, scrutinising the government, and shaping inclusive legislation. Without timely intervention, this democratic erosion is difficult to halt.

Early and strategic support to parliaments is therefore essential for democratic resilience and institutional recovery.

For donor countries, supporting parliamentary strengthening abroad is not merely altruism. It serves strategic interests. Democratic, transparent, and accountable institutions form the backbone of stable governance. In doing so, they promote investment-friendly environments, reduce risks of conflict and the drivers of irregular migration, climate-driven or otherwise, and create socio-economic opportunities that deter brain drain.

Here’s an example of how targeted parliamentary support can have a tangible impact: Albania’s recent reform of its gambling legislation. Using Westminster Foundation for Democracy’s (WFD) corruption proofing of legislation methodology, Albanian legislators assessed legal loopholes and improved transparency in regulating a high-risk industry. This effort resulted in a tighter legal and regulatory framework which reduces the potential for corruption, and that in turn provides necessary reassurances for foreign investors to embark and invest.

The example shows how donor-supported technical interventions can reduce incentives for corruption and improve the legal and economic framework. Addressing legislative vulnerabilities in this way enhances institutional integrity, promotes economic stability, economic partnerships and investments, and reinforces the rule of law.

Similarly, WFD’s work on the cost of emigration in the Western Balkans has helped to galvanise cross-party action in national parliaments in the Balkans to address the causes of brain drain and address the negative economic impacts of youth emigration.

Strategies for parliamentary strengthening

Parliamentary strengthening programmes can only be effective when they are locally-led, responding to locally-defined problems and based on genuine, trusted partnerships. Building upon this basic fact, parliamentary strengthening is most effective when approached through a range of strategies.

Regional and multi-country programming can create synergies, such as those achieved through post-legislative scrutiny (PLS) efforts in Zambia, where laws on food security were assessed for their impact in the context of climate change.
Thematic approaches, like the drafting of public debt legislation in Kenya, help parliaments tackle critical policy areas with precision. Upscaling the role of parliaments in climate governance, essential to ensure that it is transparent, inclusive and informed by social justice principles and thus resilient in the face of unprecedented levels of climate disinformation, is currently the focus of WFD’s work with the Parliament in Indonesia, for instance.
Promoting inclusion and engagement, like fostering youth participation in North Macedonia, and enhancing citizens engagement in the Maldives further increase legitimacy and democratic depth.
Mutual learning also plays a transformative role in parliamentary strengthening. Peer-to-peer exchange between legislatures in the Global North and South allows for reciprocal knowledge transfer and innovation. These exchanges have already catalysed improvements in parliamentary procedures, transparency, and administration.
Moreover, many parliaments are embracing digital transformation, using technology to improve legislative tracking, citizen engagement, and policymaking, as seen in countries like Kenya and Morocco.

Strengthening parliaments is one of the most cost-effective and sustainable interventions to bolster democracy, foster inclusive economic development, and safeguard stability and security. It is time for a renewed commitment to a standards-based approach to parliamentary development, one that is principled, context-sensitive, and collaborative.

Delving deeper

If you are interested in delving deeper into parliamentary strengthening, WFD has been involved in producing a number of efforts and initiatives to inform and guide parliamentary strengthening efforts. I invite you to explore them:

The Global Community of Practice on Post-Legislative Scrutiny, the peer-to-peer network of the Inter Pares project, and the Agora parliamentary portal offer collaborative platforms for sharing experiences, best practices, and innovations as well as helping to build and sustain momentum. Through the network of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (CPA), Public Accounts Committees in Asia-Pacific aligned strategies and working methods at a regional workshop hosted by the Fiji Parliament. The AFRIPAL conference recently launched the African Association of Legislation. These networks help parliaments navigate complex challenges together, amplifying the impact of support and creating a shared commitment to democratic governance.

The Common Principles for Support to Parliaments, developed by the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) in cooperation with WFD and others, emphasise that effective support must be guided by parliaments’ own needs, adapted to local contexts, and focused on long-term sustainability. Inclusive of all political orientations, grounded in international democratic norms, and attentive to gender equality and local expertise, these principles provide a shared roadmap for meaningful and ethical engagement.

The Indicators for Democratic Parliaments, were launched by the IPU with the support of WFD and other partner organizations. These 25 indicators, aligned with Sustainable Development Goals 16.6 and 16.7, enable parliaments to assess their own performance across effectiveness, accountability, transparency, responsiveness, inclusivity, participation, and representation. Each indicator includes detailed dimensions and criteria, offering a comprehensive yet practical self-assessment tool. In Pakistan, the use of these indicators served as a SWOT analysis of the Senate, while in Albania, the assessment culminated in a new Open Parliament Action Plan.

The WFD Guidelines for AI in Parliament have gained global traction in advising on an ethical and step-by-step approach to the use of AI in parliamentary proceedings.

About the authors

Franklin De Vrieze is the Head of Practice Accountability for the Westminster Foundation for Democracy

We were very busy at the PSA Conference in Birmingham, with lots of interesting new research, a busy AGM and fun social event at Rudy’s Pizza!

Our Panels

PSA25 began with the panel ‘Crisis, conflict and containment in parliamentary settings,’ featuring a rich mix of theory, quantitative work, and cases from multiple continents. Professor Rick Whitaker (Leicester) and Dr Philip Lynch explored ‘consensus and conflict’ in
House of Commons committees, examining divisions over inquiry reports. Dr Nathan Critch (Manchester), with Dr Dillon Wamsley and Dr Joseph Ward (Sheffield), analysed the ‘politics of containment’ in contemporary UK politics. Damilola Olorunshola (Bayreuth) discussed Nigeria’s post-COVID recovery for small businesses, and Kubra Aslan (York) examined Turkey’s ‘authoritarian drift’ and the opposition’s role in democratic backsliding.

We continued with a fascinating panel titled ‘Leadership in parliamentarism and the executive-legislative relationships’. Two of the papers provided a rich UK historical perspective on political leadership, whilst the third one added a very interesting comparative angle with a case study from sub-state legislative level in Mexico. Dr. James Strong from the Queen Mary University London explored leadership in the House of Commons in wartime through a series of insightful examples from history, and Mr. Peter Just, from the Centre for Legislative Studies at the University of Hull, explored the relationship of former Prime Ministers with the UK Parliament. The panel ended with an analysis of the legislative
process in the approval of the budget in the state of Guanajuato in Mexico, which highlighted significant political and institutional dynamics shaping the process.

We ended the first day with a panel on parliamentary reform and public engagement. PSA Parliaments Treasurer and Membership Officer Lauren Martin (Sheffield) presented updates from her research on e-petitions. Dr Louise Thompson (Manchester) and Prof Cristina Leston-Bandeira talked about Westminster Hall, and what its changing roles reveal about parliamentary reform. This was followed by a fascinating presentation on engagement in a
multi-level parliamentary environment in Belgium, by Dr Sofia Serra-Silva (Lisbon). Next, Dr Tom Fleming (UCL) presented a new typology of procedural change in parliaments, drawing
on types of changes in the UK House of Commons procedures.

Our second day of panels began with a fascinating session on ‘Parliament as a workplace and organisational practices’. It began with a fascinating presentation from Dr James Weinberg at the University of Sheffield with his research on the mental health of MPs and in particular the unique stresses faced by incoming MPs. This was followed by Dr Alex Prior at London South Bank University and Dr Louise Thompson at the University of Manchester who discussed their research on the effectiveness of parliamentary member organisations, namely the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. Then Andre Vella of the University of Birmingham, rounded up our morning panel with his fantastic presentation on parliamentary immunity in commonwealth legislative assemblies. This was a very interesting panel, with each of our speakers engaging with the behaviour, speeches and health of parliamentarians across institutions and in differing contexts.

The panel on legislative scrutiny also brought together interesting new research from our members. Dr Marc Geddes (Edinburgh) presented recent work from his project on how
select committees gather evidence, focusing on who gets cited in select committee reports. Dr Tom Caygill (Nottingham Trent) shared new findings on post-legislative scrutiny in the
Scottish Parliament. Zhan Chen (PhD candidate at Edinburgh) presented to our specialist group for the first time, with some initial findings from her PhD on voting alliances in the UK
House of Commons. We ended with research on select committee chairs and their impact in a paper by Dr Stephen Holden Bates (Birmingham), Dr Caroline Bhattacharya (Helsinki) and
Dr Calixte Bloquet (IPPR Berlin).

We finished our time at PSA25 with the panel ‘Representation and gendered patterns of parliamentary behaviour’. We started with Rainbow Murray’s (QMUL) research on gendered participation and conduct in parliamentary debates, which was complemented by Resul Umit’s (Durham) presentation on gendered interactions in the House of Commons. We then heard all about weddings, banquets and funerals from Tao Wang (Manchester), who was presenting his research on constituency relationships in Taiwan. We finished the panel – and our time at PSA25 – by hearing from Naira Al Iawati (Oman) on gender dynamics in the
Omani elected lower house. All four presentations provided interesting insights on representation and gendered parliamentary behaviour, demonstrating important similarities and differences across the world.

Our AGM

Thank you very much for all of you who attended our AGM. It was good to see so many of you there. Our AGM was dominated by four important matters:

Saying good-bye to our co-convenor, Dr. Caroline Battharachya, who stepped down in April after serving the convening team of PSA Specialist group for two terms. We want to thank Caroline again for all the work she has done, congratulate her on her
passing her VIVA successfully and for the new job, and wish her all the best in the future.
Welcoming Grace Cooper (PhD candidate at the University of York) to our convening team as our Events Officer. Grace has long been a friend of the PSA Parliaments, and we are thrilled to start working with her.
Our PSA Parliaments Annual Conference will continue to happen annually and we are actively looking for hosting partner institutions for this year. So, if you are interested
in hosting us this year, please let us know by emailing Grace
(grace.cooper@york.ac.uk) Diana (d.stirbu@lonodnmet.ac.uk) or Ruxandra (ruxandra.serban.13@ucl.ac.uk).
We took a decision (not an easy one) to charge a small fee for the PSA Parliaments Annual Conference from this year. This will add more sustainability to our annual conference and potentially free up some funding to support other activities during the year. We will keep you posted with developments and hopefully announce the location of the November conference soon.

Celebrating the excellence of our members

We want to congratulate once again our PSA Parliaments members Prof. Cristina Leston-Bandeira (University of Leeds) and Dr. Alexandra Meakin (University of Leeds) for their
fantastic and well-deserved academic prizes. Prof. Leston-Bandeira was celebrated by the PSA and awarded the Sir Isaiah Berlin Prize for outstanding professional contributions to political studies, whilst Dr. Meakin was awarded the Sir Bernard Crick Prize outstanding contributions to advancing teaching and learning in political studies by an early career academic.