Author: psaparliaments

Categories
Blog

The benefits of bringing academics and practitioners together: Writing the second edition of Exploring Parliament

By Cristina Leston-Bandeira, Alexandra Meakin and Louise Thompson.

The following blog post is about Exploring Parliament, which was published by Oxford University Press in April 2025 and will be launched at the Institute for Government on 15 May 2025. You can sign up to watch online here.

Over the last three years we have been working with a fantastic team of 38 academics and 35 parliamentary practitioners to create the second edition of the Exploring Parliament textbook. Like its predecessor, the book has collaboration at its very heart. The chapter topics stem from a roundtable discussion between academics and officials at the PSA’s Annual Conference back in April 2022 and wherever possible academics were paired with practitioners in order to write each chapter. Our aim was to create a fresh perspective on a wide range of aspects of the UK Parliament, including its relationship with the devolved parliaments; one which was grounded in key academic concepts and research, but enriched with the real-life details that only those who walk the corridors of Westminster can provide.

In this blog post, we reflect on the process of creating this new edition. We asked a small group of our contributors how they found the experience of working on the book and the benefits for academics of working with practitioners, and vice versa.  

Putting a spotlight on less studied aspects of Parliament

Some of our authors were returning contributors who had previously written in the first edition of the textbook, while others were new to the process.  Although our academics tended to write on topics which they have researched for a long time, our practitioners appreciated the chance to explain how parliament works to a different type of audience and to include examples which students may not have heard about before. In particular, those writing on the devolved parliaments highlighted the utility of a book which appreciates that Westminster works alongside other devolved institutions:

 “it was an opportunity to explain Parliament’s work—particularly the House of Lords—using examples that students and other readers may not have come across before” (Rosanna Barry, House of Lords)

“So often books, reports and studies on parliament in the UK focus on the UK Parliament alone, forgetting that the UK has four legislatures… As someone working in a devolved legislature it can be a frustrating experience to read work that doesn’t reflect your own experience or makes recommendations and conclusions that aren’t relevant or practical in a devolved or sub-nation state context…The opportunity to write a chapter about the work of parliaments in the UK from a devolved perspective, albeit on a UK-wide issue wasn’t something we couldn’t pass up. Any chance to raise awareness of the work of the four different legislatures in the UK is really welcome” (Nia Moss, Senedd)

“At times, textbooks on British politics tend to be quite Westminster centric and I was actually very happy to see how a book and Westminster Parliament itself considers the wider context, which I think is very important” (Prof Diana Stirbu, London Metropolitan University)

Collaborations between academics and practitioners

Academics and practitioners work in roles with very different expectations around the research and writing process. Practitioners for instance tend to write in a more factual style, in a much faster paced environment with shorter deadlines. Academics on the other hand typically have a much longer writing process and are more used to explaining concepts to a student audience.  Bringing the two groups together was an enjoyable experience (for most!), adding a fresh dose of reality to the academics’ writing and allowing practitioners the chance to write for a very different type of audience:

“The combination of academics and Parliament practitioners is a great one, as it combines our political science with a sense of how things really are. My co-author was also a quants whizz with a great head for figures, so could help me on that, where I am (erm) not so expert.” (Ben Worthy, Birkbeck)

“It was a great experience: we brought different skills, perspectives and experiences to the process and that meant we worked really well together as we could complement each other’s way of thinking and working. I feel like I learnt a lot!” (UK Parliament official)

“Working on this chapter was a change of speed. Initially we had a long time to produce a first draft, followed by shorter more intensive bursts of effort during the editing process.” (Rosanna Barry, House of Lords)

 “Although I probably write tens of thousands of words a year in my role in the Senedd, none of these words are particularly ‘academic’. I think I used the phrase ‘I’m not an academic’ more times in conversations with the book’s editors, as a means of forewarning them, than they’ve ever heard before. … We work in a fact paced environment where you have moved on to probably the ten ‘next things’ you need to do before what you worked on last week was even published. We’re busy dealing with the next issue on our desk before we have had time to reflect on last week’s problem. Being forced to take a step back and really reflect on the issue, the work that’s been achieved and the challenges that remain was a privilege I don’t often get afforded and it’s what I enjoyed most” (Nia Moss, Senedd)

“I learned such a lot from [my co-author] about the procedures and protocols and about how the conventions work in practice.” (Ruth Dixon, University of Oxford)

“not being too precious about one’s own writing was helpful. We allowed each other to keep and toss content and re-draft, as this is where there seems to be a lot of difference in how academics and practitioners write” (Ekaterina Kolpinskaya, University of Exeter)

Writing in an accessible manner

Textbooks require a very different type of writing to standard academic journal articles or parliamentary briefings. Both groups of authors needed to think about how to condense what were often very broad topics into short, succinct chapters which provided enough description to explain how processes work, but also contained some analysis of why things happen and the impact they have:

“Bearing in mind that this is a textbook, it was a useful discipline to stick to explaining clearly the normal course of events, without quibbles or little-used variations or historical footnotes” (Liam Laurence-Smyth, House of Commons)

“It’s easy to get lost, especially with something like trust in politics, which is hugely complex and nuanced. My co-author was great at picking out the key drivers, nature of the problem and possible solutions. They helped keep me out of what my teacher at A-levels called the ‘waffle bog’, a place where I find myself far too often.” (Ben Worthy, Birkbeck)

What worked well was being able to reflect on our practical and ‘real world’ experience of how interparliamentary relations is working on the ground. It really helped to focus on what the key message/story of the chapter should be. It hopefully helped to ensure that those reading it will get a real sense of what the genuine issues from people working on the issue day in and day out are rather than just a theoretical perspective.” (Nia Moss, Senedd)

The ongoing relevance of the book in the 2024 Parliament

The book was written shortly before the 2024 General Election and as such the case studies used are from previous Parliaments. Nevertheless, it has quickly become apparent how relevant the book’s themes are in the current Parliament:

“In some senses, 2024 was the ultimate trust (or distrust) election, so the chapter speaks to how the government faces in huge challenge, in somehow winning back or convincing hugely distrustful and cynical voters, against some very strong anti-elite, anti-system head winds. Can a government win back trust (relatively quickly) by delivering on promises? And what happens if they don’t?” (Ben Worthy, Birkbeck)

“Private Member’s Bills became a hot topic at the end of 2024 when the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill was introduced by backbencher Kim Leadbeater.  We had already completed our chapter by the time the bill was introduced, but I think that our explanation of the stages of a PMB will help anyone trying to understand the complex procedures.” (Ruth Dixon, University of Oxford) 

“Our chapter is relevant for the 2024 parliament as it sets the scene of multilevel presentation and parliamentary activity across the UK. It is important for all MPs and especially to new MPs to be aware of the broader parliamentary context across the UK, to understand the differences and similarities between the different systems” (Prof Diana Stirbu, London Metropolitan University)

“Our chapter also speaks strongly to the principles and core aspirations of the ongoing efforts to make Parliament more accessible – for politicians, other passholders and visitors – both as part of the R&R programme and through the efforts of the Modernisation Committee and the work of the Speaker’s Office” (Ekaterina Kolpinskaya, University of Exeter)

“One of the Modernisation Committee challenges in the 2024 Parliament is to improve accessibility by demystifying parliamentary language. My chapter, and Exploring Parliament as a whole, is committed to bringing clarity to the inevitable complexity of legislative activity.” (Liam Laurence-Smyth, House of Commons)

It has been a real privilege to edit the second edition of Exploring Parliament. We have had the opportunity to work with a fantastic set of authors who have demonstrated the real value in bringing academics and practitioners together. We echo the views of one of our contributors who told us that “it was genuinely one of the most enjoyable things I did last year”.

About the authors

Cristina Leston-Bandeira is Professor of Politics at the University of Leeds. Alexandra Meakin is Lecturer in British Politics, also at the University of Leeds. Louise Thompson is Senior Lecturer in Politics at the University of Manchester.  Exploring Parliament was published by Oxford University Press in April 2025 and will be launched at the Institute for Government on 15 May 2025. You can sign up to watch online here.

Categories
Blog

A Snapshot of Gendered Membership Patterns in the Scottish Parliament’s Committee System

[i]

By Stephen Holden Bates.

The Scottish Parliament’s Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee (SPPA) is currently running an inquiry on committee effectiveness with a number of usual (and sometimes unusual) suspects appearing to give evidence. One theme of the inquiry is the structure of committees with SPPA already agreeing that “as a minimum, there should be no single sex committees”. Below I offer a snapshot view of the gendered membership patterns found in the Scottish committee system[ii]. Female MSPS are underrepresented, although sometimes only by a relatively small amount, across the system as a whole in all positions except those which are most junior, where they are overrepresented. Female MSPs are also unevenly spread across the committees. This unevenness, I argue, is problematic and unlikely to be solved unless more radical reforms than currently proposed by SPPA are implemented, such as those recommended in the Scottish Parliament’s 2023 Gender Sensitive Audit (GSA) Report.

Female MSPs in the Committee System

In April 2025, the proportion of committee convenors (chairs) who were female was 37.5% and the proportion of Deputy Convenors was 33.3%, while 42.7% of non-government MSPs were female. Compared to the data published in May 2024 by the Scottish Parliament as part of its commitment to ensuring equal representation and participation, the April 2025 figures show a decrease in female Convenors (from 53%) and an increase in female Deputy Convenors (from 21%).

With regard to members and substitute members (MSPs who cover for committee members of the same party when they are unavailable), the proportion of committee places and substitute positions across the whole system filled by female MSPs was 40.2% and 50.9% respectively.

Given the number of committees and committee positions and the relatively small size of the Scottish Parliament, many MSPs have to sit on more than one committee. When substitute positions are excluded, the average male and female MSP sits on 1.35 and 1.29 committees respectively, suggesting that male MSPs have the (slightly) heavier committee workload. However, when substitute positions are included, a different picture emerges with the average male and female MSP sitting on 1.78 and 1.85 committees respectively.

Overall, then, while recognising that committee turnover is high and membership patterns can change relatively quickly, it remains the case that female MSPs are currently underrepresented in the more senior positions of the committee system compared to their presence in the Scottish Parliament, even if sometimes only by a relatively small amount. As the GSA shows, this has not always been the case, especially in the first two parliaments, but it does appear to be a feature of the sixth. Female MSPs are also overrepresented in what can be considered the least glamourous position, where they both presumably often have to change their work schedule at short notice and have less opportunity to specialise in particular policy areas. These findings suggest that gendered vertical divisions of labour persist in the Scottish committee system.

Female MSPs across the Committee System

If we look at which committees female MSPs tend to be members of, then another gendered pattern emerges, one related to horizontal divisions of labour – the policy areas in which male and female parliamentarians tend to work. Tables 1 and 2 below show the gender of the Convenor for each committee and the proportion of female members. Those committee shaded light blue and light orange cover what can be considered stereotypically masculine and feminine policy areas respectively (with no shading indicating a neutral policy area)[iii].

As can be seen, the spread of female and male convenors and members across committees mostly conforms to what might be expected. There are a couple of exceptions – the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture committee is convened by a female MSP (although she is the only member) and the Education, Children and Young People committee has both a male convenor and a majority male membership – but, in the main, female MSPs are overrepresented in convenorships and committees covering policy areas which are stereotypically viewed as feminine (and perhaps less prestigious) and underrepresented in convenorships and committees covering policy areas which are stereotypically viewed as masculine (and perhaps more prestigious). Again, as shown by the GSA, some of these patterns are long-standing with, for example, male MSPs tending to be over-represented on finance-related committees and female MSPs on equalities- and on health-related committees (especially when the latter are not associated with sport).

Table 1: Gender of Convenor by Committee

Table 2: Proportion of female members by Committee (excluding substitutes)

If we believe that diversity within committees is important and not just within the committee system, then this is a problematic state of affairs. Moreover, the uneven spread of female and male MSPs across committees covering different policy areas (and with differing levels of prestige) is unlikely to be addressed by introducing a reform that stipulates that there must be at least one female and one male MSP on each committee. It is for this reason that my preference is for Big Bang reforms, such as those already recommended by the GSA Board which proposed that there should be a minimum of 40% women for committee convenorships,  that every committee should broadly mirror the gender balance in the Parliament as a whole, and that, where parties either elect or appoint more than one member to a committee, the party’s membership must be mixed.

[i] An earlier version of this blog was published in which I did not give enough prominence to ongoing work within the Scottish Parliament regarding equality, representation and participation and, in particular, the work of Fiona McKay in producing the Scottish Gender-Sensitive Parliament Audit. I apologise to those involved in this work for this omission which should not have happened.

[ii] This snapshot is taken from data provided in the SPICe Fact Sheet “Scottish Parliament committees: current committees, remits and membership” published on 30th April 2025.

[iii] These categorisations are adapted from Goodwin et al. (2021) who in turn adapted them from Krook and O’Brien (2012). The categorisations here are not perfectly fitted because of the often large and disparate policy areas that committees cover. For example, using the Krook and O’Brien typology, the Europe and external affairs parts of the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture committee can be viewed as masculine, whereas the constitution and culture parts can be considered neutral. In such circumstances, I have categorised the committee in relation to what I assume is the most prominent focus of the committee.

About the author

Dr Stephen Holden Bates is a Senior Lecturer in Political Science at the University of Birmingham

Categories
Events News

PSA Parliaments at #PSA25

The PSA Annual Conference is around the corner, and we are very excited to share the details of the six panels that we are hosting during the first two days of the conference. We are delighted to have such a diverse group of familiar and new faces to present their work on a range of topics.

Please note all panels will take place in room LOB101 in the Library of Birmingham.

On Monday, 14th April, we kick off with a panel on Crisis, conflict, and containment in parliamentary settings at 9:30am. This will be followed by our Annual General Meeting (in the same room) at 11:30am. After lunch, we continue with two panels, starting with one on Leadership in parliamentarism and the executive–legislative relationship and another one on Parliamentary reform and public engagement.

PanelsDay1

We are hosting a social (self-sponsored) pizza night after the conference drinks reception at 7.45pm. If you would like to join us, please fill in this form:

Our panels on Tuesday, 15th April, begin at 9:30am with one on Parliament as a workplace and organisational practices. At 1.30pm, we host a panel on Legislative scrutiny and parliamentary responsiveness. We finish the second conference day with a panel on the topic of Representation and gendered patterns of parliamentary behaviour.

PanelsDay2

We are really looking forward to seeing you in Birmingham!

Categories
News

March 2025 Newsletter

Hello! We anticipated a busy year for parliamentary scholars and it is proving to be so. We have lots of exciting news and opportunities for you in this newsletter.

  1. PSA Parliaments Undergraduate Essay Competition 2025: Now open!
  2. Members’ Spotlight
  3. Opportunities
  4. Call for Papers
  5. Recent Publications
  6. On the Blog
  7. Overview of Parliaments Map

If you have any notices/messages you would like us to circulate to our group, please let us know.

Best wishes,

Caroline, Diana, Ruxandra, Jack and Lauren

1. PSA Parliaments Undergraduate Essay Competition 2025: Now open!

If you have been busy marking assignments during the last few weeks and have come across some excellent student essays, please consider nominating the student for our annual essay prize. This is a great opportunity for them to get their work recognised and read by a broader audience and add an award to their CV. The winner and runner-up will also receive £100 and £50 in prize money respectively.

The nominating academic has to be based at a UK institution and a member of our specialist group. The essay can cover any aspect of parliaments and legislatures and does not have to be written for a parliamentary studies module.

The deadline for nominations is Friday, 11 July 2025, and everything you need to know can be found on our website.

2. Members’ Spotlight

If you are looking for an interesting read, our very own PSA Parliaments co-convenor, Ruxandra Serban, co-authored two very interesting pieces on the UCL Constitution Unit Blog about the French parliament failed experimentation with Prime Minister’s Questions: 

Additionally, Professor Meg Russel, the Director of the UCL Constitution Unit published a new piece ‘Should we be worried about the decline of parliamentary scrutiny?’. The article draws attention to a number of concerns (including fast-tracked government bills, government amendments to its own bills and late responses to select committee reports) and makes suggestions for improvements.

3. Opportunities

Share your research with the UK Parliament via POSTnotes

POST, the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, is calling for research contributions and information relevant to the upcoming briefing below:

The deadline to submit a contribution to the role of public engagement in improving trust in parliamentary systems and scrutiny is 3 March 2025.

LSE Job

The London School of Economics and Political Science is looking for a Fellow in Political Behaviour. This is a 2-year position (with a possible extension for another year). The deadline for application is 7 March 2025, and the full details are available here.

Reminder: Senedd Review of the Public Bill and Member Bill processes

The Business Committee of the Senedd has opened a consultation to gather experiences and views regarding the operation and effectiveness of the Senedd’s scrutiny of Public Bills and Member Bills. You can share your expertise until 28 March 2025. All the information is available here.

4. Call for Papers

EPOP Annual Conference, 4-6 September, University of Exeter

A Call for Papers proposals is currently under way for the 2025 Elections, Public Opinion and Parties Annual Conference, organised by the University of Exeter (4-6 September 2025). Deadline to submit abstracts is 30 April 2025. The submission link is here.

5. Recent Publications

If you would like your published research to be featured in this section, please email Caroline with details.

6. On the Blog

We would love to have more contributions on our blog. If you have an idea for a blog on some aspect of parliamentary study, please get in touch with our communications officer Jack.

7. Overview of Parliaments Map

For anybody who wishes to cover any of the countries not yet covered in our map, contact our communications officer Jack.

Categories
Blog

Does beauty matter? Physical appearance in candidate selection for German parliamentary elections

By Calixte Bloquet and Danny Schindler.

After the collapse of the “traffic light” coalition and the dissolution of the Bundestag, Germany is gearing up for new elections on February 23rd, 2025. Happening in an incredibly fragile international and national context, the German elections are likely to be of vital importance. Yet, as with every election, the outcome is uncertain, as many topics collide in the campaign, and many voters are still undecided. One of the criteria for their choices will be who the candidates are: what they offer in terms of policies, which party they come from, whether they provide leadership skills and trustworthiness … And, to a lesser extent, how attractive they are.

Physical appearance does not usually top the list of criteria when picking a political representative, yet it can be particularly relevant in the case of parliamentary elections, where many little-known candidates are discovered for the first time on election posters. In the current German campaign, it is occasionally mentioned, with Green chancellor candidate Robert Habeck being described in medias as “probably the most attractive candidate for chancellor”. We take this opportunity to look into the role of attractiveness in candidate selection in German parties, how important it is, and for whom.

When and how to measure attractiveness?

The literature has already shown that attractiveness (slightly) improves the chances of being elected, in general but also in Germany specifically, be it in regional, national or European elections. But if it seems to be established that it matters to voters, little is known about how important it is for selectors inside parties, i.e., when it comes to deciding who can run for election in the first place: do selectors anticipate physical characteristics to be of importance, or do they take their decisions based on exclusively political criteria?

To answer this question, we draw on a party survey on candidate selection for the 19th Bundestag (2017-2021). More specifically, we asked more than 9000 party selectors in randomly selected nomination meetings at both district and state level (party lists), representing each party in the Bundestag, to judge which of a list of criteria were important or unimportant when nominating a candidate. Among the list, two items can be related to physical appearance: “attractiveness” (“Attraktivität”) on the one hand, and “well-groomed appearance” (“gepflegtes Erscheinungsbilds”) on the other.

Ultimately, our survey question does not measure the actual influence of physical appearance, but rather how willing selectors are to say these characteristics matter. This implies that respondents are likely under-reporting, either because they are unwilling to disclose what could be regarded as a “superficial” concern compared to political orientation, or because they might not be aware of its full influence on them.

What role does appearance play in the candidate selection process?

So does beauty matter? According to our data, both attractiveness and well-groomed appearance are relevant for the nomination of Bundestag candidates, to varying degrees: a third of respondents say attractiveness is important or very important (32,6%), and four fifths that a well-groomed appearance is (79,8%). Those results seem unrelated to the amount of political experience, for example the time spent weekly on party work or whether or not one holds a leadership position: committed members rated attractiveness and appearance as just as important or unimportant as less active ones.

What seems to matter most are social characteristics and political orientation – and through them, likely moral values. Indeed, our results seem to indicate that the older, less educated and more conservative party selectors are, the more likely they are to declare that either attractiveness or a well-groomed appearance matter. All those effects remain true in a multivariate model. On the other hand, younger, more educated and more progressive party selectors are less likely to admit the same, either because it influences them less, or because it is less appropriate of a thing to admit in those contexts. In ideological terms, party members of the conservative CDU and CSU attach more than twice as often importance to attractiveness than their counterparts among the Left Party or the Greens. As far as gender goes, if a well-groomed appearance is rated as similarly important by men and women, men attribute slightly more importance to attractiveness than women (Figure 1 and 2).

It is not to say that rational considerations do not also play their part: regardless of those other factors, selectors report that physical appearance matters less when nominating multiple candidates for lists rather than one individual candidate for a district. This is hardly surprising, when lists are composed of several dozens of candidates, most of them placed way too low to ever have a chance to be elected anyway. But this does not mitigate the importance of the other factors in any way.

***

To be sure, the importance of physical appearance in candidate selection should not be overestimated: other selection criteria carry greater weight. In our survey for example, more than 94% of respondents considered it important that the nominees demonstrate expertise in certain policy areas and are approachable. However, physical appearance does also come into play, not only in competition between parties, but also in internal party selection processes. In a context where personalization of politics, even in Germany, keeps rising, candidates might be able to find here some competitive advantage.

About the authors

Dr Calixte Bloquet is a Research Associate at the Institute for Parliamentary Research, where Dr Danny Schindler is the director.

Categories
News

February 2025 Newsletter

Hello, everyone! We anticipated a busy year for parliamentary scholars and it is proving to be so. We have lots of exciting news and opportunities for you in this newsletter.

  1. Reminder: PSA General Conference, Birmingham, 14-16 April 2025
  2. Calls for Papers
  3. Opportunities
  4. Upcoming Events
  5. Recent Publications
  6. On the Blog
  7. Overview of Parliaments Map

If you have any notices/messages you would like us to circulate to our group, please let us know.

Best wishes,

Caroline, Diana, Ruxandra, Jack and Lauren

1. Reminder: PSA General Conference, Birmingham, 14–16 April 2025

Key Reminders for PSA25 Delegates

Paper Givers Registration Deadline:

All paper presenters must register by 10 February 2025 to ensure inclusion in the final programme. If you haven’t yet registered, you can do so here.

Panel Sessions Format:

  • Panel sessions are 90 minutes long, with 60 minutes for presentations and at least 30 minutes for discussion and audience questions.
  • Presenters will have 15–20 minutes each, adjusted by the Chair if there are more than four papers in a session.
  • Please ensure you bring your presentation on a USB stick, along with any necessary adapters for HDMI connection, as full papers are not required.

Booking Hotels and Accommodation

The conference is taking place in the heart of the city, being a 10-minute walk away from the main train station (Birmingham New Street) and surrounded by various hotels. We encourage you to secure accommodation sooner than later as the conference is just around the corner!

Early Bird Registration

The early-bird registration for the PSA Annual Conference is still open until 21 February 2025. Daily rates are available for early-career members. All information can be found here and the outline programme has been published.

Late Paper Submissions 

The PSA25 Late Paper Submissions form is now available for those who wish to propose paper abstracts for inclusion in specific panels in the conference programme. To learn more and submit your abstract, please visit the PSA25 event page on our website. The deadline for submissions is 14 February 2025, 12pm GMT.

2. Calls for Papers

Reminder: Conference of the ECPR Standing Group on Parliaments, 2–4 July, Barcelona, University of Barcelona

The ECPR Standing Group on Parliaments is hosting its 9th flagship conference this summer in vibrant Barcelona, offering an invaluable experience for anyone studying or researching in the field. 

  • The Call for Panels and Papers is still open until 12 February 2025.
  • Registration deadline is 19 March 2025.
  • For more information, please click here.

Women in Legislative Studies (WiLS) Virtual Research Workshop, 25 April  2025

WiLS is offering a virtual research workshop for scholars at all levels. The workshop will be divided into morning and afternoon sessions and will run from 10 am to 4 pm EST (with a break for lunch). For more information, please contact:

Proposals are due by the end of Wednesday, February 5. The full conference program will be available in late-February. If you are interested in participating as a presenter or discussant please fill this form.

3. Opportunities

Opportunity to join the PSA Executive Committee

The PSA seeks at least two new trustees for its Executive Committee, including the role of Honorary Secretary. This is a great opportunity to contribute to enhancing the study of Politics and International Relations and build your own profile. Nominations close on 10 March 2025, and you can find out more here.

Senedd Review of the Public Bill and Member Bill processes

The Business Committee of the Senedd has opened a consultation to gather experiences and views regarding the operation and effectiveness of the Senedd’s scrutiny of Public Bills and Member Bills. You can share your expertise until 28 March 2025. All the information is available here.

Scottish Parliament: Research opportunity

The Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body (SPCB) is seeking to award a contract for research that will support the SPCB Supported Bodies Landscape Review Committee’s inquiry. This desk-based research will set out how other countries set up their commissioners (and why) and how their outcomes are measured. It will support the Committee’s understanding of how other models work in the UK and internationally, and whether aspects of these models could be applied to the Scottish landscape.

For more information and how to obtain a ‘Quotation Pack’, please email academia@parliament.scot quoting Reference: 2023-24/02/SSBLR. The deadline for quotes is 23:59 on Sunday 16 February 2025.

4. Upcoming Events

UCL Constitutional Unit: Improving Parliamentary Scrutiny of Legislation, 24 February, 1-2.15pm


The Constitution Unit at the UCL is organising an exciting expert panel on improving parliamentary scrutiny of legislation. Recent years have seen frequent complaints about the quality of legislative scrutiny by parliament, and particularly by the House of Commons. Various commentators and experts have argued that the scrutiny of proposed laws is too often rushed and/or inadequate, leading to worse policy outcomes for citizens. This online seminar will explore a number of important questions. What problems are there with the legislative process? Have they got worse? And what can be done to fix them?

Speakers:

  • Professor Meg Russell – Director of the Constitution Unit
  • Sir David Natzler – former Clerk of the House of Commons
  • Dr Daniel Gover – Senior Lecturer in British Politics, Queen Mary University of London

Chair: Lisa James – Senior Research Fellow, Constitution Unit

For more information please see here.

5. Recent Publications

Other resources:

If you would like your published research to be featured in this section, please email Caroline with details.

6. On the Blog

We would love to have more contributions on our blog. If you have an idea for a blog on some aspect of parliamentary study, please get in touch with our communications officer Jack.

7. Overview of Parliaments Map

For anybody who wishes to cover any of the countries not yet covered in our map, contact our communications officer Jack.

Categories
Blog

Democratic innovation through AI in parliaments

By Franklin De Vrieze.

As well as debating and adopting new legislation aimed at establishing a sustainable legal framework for the governance of AI, parliaments are also exploring and experimenting with the application of AI in their own operations. New AI guidelines by Westminster Foundation for Democracy (WFD) can inform their efforts.

According to the 2024 AI Index Report by Stanford University, the global legislative landscape has seen a significant increase in AI-related laws over recent years. From 2016 to 2023, parliaments in 127 countries passed a total of 123 bills mentioning AI in various contexts. These laws address a variety of issues, including educational reforms, non-discrimination in AI algorithms, and the establishment of AI training programs. This trend highlights the increasing recognition of the need for regulatory frameworks to manage the development and deployment of AI technologies responsibly.

The legislative measures aim to ensure that AI advancements benefit society while mitigating potential risks of AI being manipulated or misused. Therefore, parliaments need to ensure that the adoption of AI is guided by stringent policies, ethical testing, and comprehensive training, as highlighted in WFD’s recent policy brief, “A Democratic Approach to Global Artificial Intelligence (AI) Safety.”

Current applications of AI in parliament

Parliaments have started exploring and experimenting with the application of AI in their own operations. As Dr. Fitsilis from the Hellenic Parliament argues: “the rise of AI is expected to play a significant role in transforming legislatures from paper-based organisations into data-driven institutions”.

The Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) has shared insights on “Use cases for AI in parliaments”, highlighting the growing integration of AI in parliamentary functions.

  • Firstly, AI is increasingly used for transcription and translation, managing records of debates, and subtitling video content. For example, Estonia’s Parliament automates stenography, while Italy’s Senate leverages AI for translating documents. Finland’s Parliament uses AI to summarise documents and create podcast audio, and Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies uses AI to transcribe audio and video files. These tools save time, enhancing productivity and allowing staff to focus on more complex tasks.
  • Secondly, AI is introduced to assist in drafting legislation and amendments and analysing large volumes of text to identify key themes and insights. This can help in creating more comprehensive and well-informed legislative documents. For instance, the Italian Chamber of Deputies uses AI to receive, store and number amendments according to presentation time (voting order) and uses AI to compare amendments to identify similarities. Brazil’s Chamber applies AI to interpret and group amendments, while Italy’s Senate uses it to ensure compliance with drafting rules, ensuring consistency, accuracy and adherence to legal standards.
  • Thirdly, AI supports public engagement by analysing public submissions. Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies uses AI to categorise citizen comments on bills, while Italy’s Senate employs AI to facilitate natural language queries about bills, enhancing accessibility and user experience. This means AI systems are helping citizens interact with parliamentary activities, such as answering questions about legislative processes or providing information on parliamentary sessions.
  • Fourthly, AI is employed in classification systems to manage large data volumes. Italy’s Chamber of Deputies uses AI to categorise plenary session reports, while the European Parliament applies it for automatic text classification with predefined labels.
  • Finally, AI powers chatbots and user support, improving access to parliamentary processes. Italy’s Chamber of Deputies provides a chatbot for querying parliamentary proceedings, and Estonia’s Parliament uses AI to subtitle live broadcasts for the hearing impaired. AI also automates tasks like schedule management and responses to common queries, while enhancing cybersecurity.

Lessons learned

Based on the lived experience of AI in parliament, there are already a few lessons learned on the governance of AI in parliaments, in line with WFD’s new Guidelines for AI in Parliaments..

Parliaments need to adopt a cautious, step-by-step approach to integrating AI, particularly with generative AI technologies. Initial experimentation should occur in controlled environments to mitigate risks before wider implementation. Such approach is emphasised in WFD’s guidelines, highlighting the importance of pilot projects and controlled rollouts to manage potential risks effectively​.

AI systems must be developed and used in accordance with ethical principles to prevent biases and ensure fair representation. WFD’s guidelines stress the importance of developing AI systems that adhere to ethical standards, preventing misinformation and stereotyping​.

Establishing clear governance structures and transparency measures is crucial. This involves setting up auditing processes, maintaining transparency about AI usage, and ensuring that AI systems can be held accountable for their outputs. The WFD guidelines recommend comprehensive transparency measures and accountability frameworks to build trust and credibility in AI applications within parliamentary functions.

Parliaments benefit from sharing experiences and best practices regarding AI implementation. Collaborative efforts, such as those facilitated by the IPU’s Centre for Innovation in Parliament, help build a collective understanding of effective AI governance. The new Global Community of Practice on Post-Legislative Scrutiny helps facilitate dialogue on applying AI in legislative scrutiny processes, as argued by Dr Marci Harris from POPVOX Foundation.

As AI technology evolves rapidly, parliaments must remain flexible and continuously update their policies. This includes partnering with academic institutions and other stakeholders to stay ahead of technological advancements and their implications. The WFD guidelines highlight the importance of ongoing education and adaptation to ensure that both parliamentarians and parliamentary staff are equipped to handle the evolving AI landscape​.

Conclusion

By building on their existing digital infrastructure, parliaments can harness the benefits of AI while ensuring accountability and protecting democratic values. The WFD Guidelines for AI in Parliament provide a comprehensive framework for this endeavour​. Parliaments may take proactive steps to pilot these guidelines, document use cases, and share best practices globally. This will not only strengthen their role as guardians of accountability but also ensure that AI serves the public good, enhances governance, and upholds the principles of democracy.

  Europe’s first political tech summit in Berlin The summit, taking place on Saturday, 25 January, will bring together the global political tech ecosystem—spanning countries and political parties—under one roof. Westminster Foundation for Democracy will lead a panel on “Democratic innovation through AI in parliaments”. Together with the German and Hellenic Parliaments and other tech experts, the panel will explore the potential of AI in fostering innovation and resilience in parliaments worldwide, balancing technological opportunities with ethical and cultural complexities. Info and registration: https://www.politicaltech.eu/  

About the authors

Franklin De Vrieze is Head of Practice Accountability at Westminster Foundation for Democracy (WFD).

Categories
News

January 2025 Newsletter

Hello, everyone! We want to wish you all a very Happy New Year! 2025 looks like a busy year for parliamentary scholars already. We have lots of exciting calls for you in this first newsletter of the year.

  1. PSA General Conference, Birmingham, 14-16 April 2025
  2. PSA Academic Prizes
  3. PSA Parliaments Members Survey
  4. Calls for Papers
  5. Opportunities
  6. Upcoming Events
  7. Urgent Questions
  8. Recent Publications
  9. On the Blog
  10. Overview of Parliaments Map

If you have any notices/messages you would like us to circulate to our group, please let us know.

Best wishes,

Caroline, Diana, Ruxandra, Jack and Lauren

1. PSA General Conference, Birmingham, 14–16 April 2025

The outline programme for the PSA 75th Annual International Conference has been released, and we are happy to host six panels. We are looking forward to seeing many of you in Birmingham.

The early-bird registration is open until 21 February 2025. For Early Career Network members, daily rates are available. More information here.

2. PSA Academic Prizes

The PSA awards a number of prizes for dissertations, professional contributions, research and teaching. The deadline for nominations is on 24 January 2025.

More details on the nomination process can be found here.

3. PSA Parliaments Members Survey

Thank you to everyone who has already filled in our members survey. We are gathering your viewpoints to plan our priorities and activities.

We are still looking to hear from our members until 24 January 2025. It should only take a couple of minutes to fill in the form.

4. Call for Papers

Conference of the Standing Group on Parliaments, 2–4 July, Barcelona, University of Barcelona

The ECPR Standing Group on Parliaments is hosting its 9th flagship conference this summer in vibrant Barcelona, offering an invaluable experience for anyone studying or researching in the field.  The Call for Panels and Papers now open and inviting proposals on national, sub-national, or international parliaments. Submissions  focusing on under-researched regions are strongly encouraged.

Panel and paper proposals deadline: 12 February 2025. 

Registration deadline: 19 March 2025.

For more information please click here.

4th Global Conference on Parliamentary Studies, Athens, 13 June 2025

The Hellenic OCR Team and Széchenyi István University, in cooperation with International Journal of Parliamentary Studies and Brill invite thought leaders to address the challenges and opportunities of our time, where technology, media and geopolitical shifts intersect with democratic governance. The conference theme is: “Reinventing Democracy for the 21st Century”.

Submissions are welcome from scholars at all career stages (including PhD students and post-doctoral researchers), as well as practitioners with relevant academic backgrounds such as law, political science, social sciences, informatics and engineering.

Abstract submission deadline: 28 February 2025. Submit your abstract here.  

More information about the event can be found here.

5. Opportunities

Updated guidance: contributing your research to POSTnotes and briefings

The Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST) have simplified and updated its guidance for researchers to share their expertise and provide contributions to POST’s work, such as POSTnotes and briefings for parliamentarians.
Researchers can feed into POST research projects by following the instructions on the contributing to POST research as an expert webpage. Contributions can be emailed to post@parliament.uk within specified deadlines. 

Call for evidence: The Speaker’s Conference on the security of candidates, MPs and elections (UK Parliament)

On 14 October 2024 the House of Commons agreed a motion to establish a committee, to be known as the Speaker’s Conference, to consider: the factors influencing the threat levels against candidates and MPs, and the effectiveness of the response to such threats. 

The committee is currently accepting written evidence from anyone with answers to the questions in the call for evidence. You can submit evidence until Friday 7 February 2025.

6. Upcoming Events

ECPR General Conference 2025, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 26–29 August 2025 

The ECPR Standing Group on Parliaments endorsed Section S08 on Advancing the Study of Parliaments: Structures, Actors and Processes at a Crossroads.

This section seeks to advance our study of parliaments as critical institutions in representative democracies, and to examine how the role and importance of parliaments has evolved over time. It focuses on the structures and organisational aspects of parliaments, as well as key actors and their relationships within and outwith these institutions (such as individual parliamentarians, parliamentary party groups, administrative staff or external stakeholders), and the processes and practices inside these political arenas. 

For more information please see here.

7. Urgent Questions with Richard Whitaker

For those of you who have missed our latest Urgent Questions with Prof. Richard in the December newsletter, worry not! You can still read it here.

8. Recent Publications

If you would like your published research to be featured in this section, please email Caroline with details.

9. On the Blog

We would love to have more contributions on our blog. If you have an idea for a blog on some aspect of parliamentary study, please get in touch with our communications officer Jack.

  • Westminster Hall: Parliament’s Best Kept Secret?, by Cristina Leston-Bandeira and Louise Thompson. This blog is based on a paper presented by the authors to the Annual Conference of the PSA Parliaments group in November 2024 at the Senedd Cymru in Cardiff.

10. Overview of Parliaments Map

For anybody who wishes to cover any of the countries not yet covered in our map, contact our communications officer Jack.

Categories
Blog

Westminster Hall: Parliament’s Best Kept Secret?

By Cristina Leston-Bandeira and Louise Thompson.

This blog is based on a paper presented by the authors to the Annual Conference of the PSA Parliaments group in November 2024 at the Senedd Cymru in Cardiff.

Photo credit: UK Parliament / Jessica Taylor: https://ukparliament.shorthandstories.com/cet-westminster-hall-debates/index.html

On 30 November 1999 Labour MP Phyllis Starkey made history, being the first MP to introduce a debate in Westminster Hall, the new parallel debating chamber for the House of Commons.  Agreed to by MPs initially as a temporary ‘experiment’ for just one parliamentary session through which to debate topics put forward by backbench MPs and by select committees, Westminster Hall has recently celebrated its 25th anniversary. It rarely attracts much attention, though recent reforms such as the introduction of debates on e-petitions, have put it more firmly into the media spotlight. 

Despite its 25 year history, we still know little about this parallel chamber – no comprehensive research has been undertaken and internal parliamentary reviews have been very limited. Has it added value to parliamentary business, as hoped when first introduced by the first Modernisation Committee in 1999? Drawing from pilot research we have undertaken over the past few months (including analysis of parliamentary debates and interviews), we take a  closer look at the business taking place in Westminster Hall debates to identify four main ways in which these can add value to the House of Commons.

1. It discusses very specific types of topics

    Although debates taking place in Westminster Hall are wide ranging, they tend to fall into two main areas. Often they are used by MPs to raise ‘hyperlocal’ issues of the sort that would not typically be selected for debate in the main chamber because they only affect a particular constituency.  Recent examples of this type of debate include dental healthcare in East Anglia and support for the hospitality sector in Eastleigh.  Westminster Hall is also a place where very emotive topics can be debated. These are often on health-based issues which have affected their constituents, such as Helen Hayes’ recent debate on lobular breast cancer. Tabled in memory of one her constituents, Heather Cripps, Hayes pushed for better awareness of the symptoms and more research into its treatment. Members of Heather’s family attended the debate and sat in the public gallery. Debates such as this one showcase a much more human side to parliamentary politics and as such, Westminster Hall can be an arena which acknowledges the grief and pain of constituents and their families.

    2. It is a place where MPs have fewer time constraints

    One of the real benefits to talking in Westminster Hall is that there is far less pressure on time. MPs introducing a debate have longer to talk and, although time limits are sometimes imposed for particularly well attended debates, other contributing MPs will generally have more time to make their speeches. One MP told us that it gave them time ‘to breathe’, allowing them to develop their points and have less choppy debates.  The MP introducing the debate will also get the right of reply to the minister’s response, something which they wouldn’t get in an adjournment debate in the main chamber.

    3. Its layout facilitates ‘physically close’ scrutiny

    Although the main House of Commons chamber can seem small and crowded at busy times, Westminster Hall is a much more intimate atmosphere. During its first ever debate, then Minister Peter Hain described it as ‘the first non-confrontational Chamber that Westminster has experienced in 800 years of political sparring’.  MPs are seated in a horseshoe seating area more akin to select committees, with all MPs and ministers at the same level.  This means that MPs sit much closer to the responding government minister. And the public gallery is within touching distance of them, with no screens acting as a barrier. MPs speak of being able to ‘look the minister in the eye’ and this can put ministers under considerable pressure, particularly during high profile debates.  The close proximity of the public gallery can be particularly powerful, facilitating conversations before and after debates and allowing the minister to see the faces of those impacted by government policy as they deliver their speech.

    4. It offers a kinder parliamentary culture

    The combination of a more intimate seating area and the more sensitive topics often debated there can facilitate a very different culture to the often adversarial Commons chamber. MPs and officials who participate regularly in Westminster Hall speak of a kinder etiquette, epitomised by DUP MP Jim Shannon’s regular notes to MPs to congratulate them on their debate and ministers going out of their way to thank every contributing Member in their responses. Although debates can occasionally become heated, the absence of any divisions and the location of Westminster Hall away from the limelight of the main chamber tends to inhibit overt partisanship in favour of a more collegiate atmosphere. 

    Debates in Westminster Hall can feel more remote to onlookers than those in the Commons chamber, but they offer something quite different. MPs have described it to us as ‘gold dust’ and ‘parliament’s best kept secret’, a chamber which is especially useful when campaigning on behalf of constituents. With the new Modernisation Committee hoping to look at how to make backbench debates more effective, this Parliament could bring opportunities to entrench the value of Westminster Hall in parliament’s work even more fully.

    About the authors

    Cristina Leston-Bandeira is Professor of Politics at the University of Leeds. Louise Thompson is Senior Lecturer in Politics at the University of Manchester.

    Categories
    News

    December 2024 Newsletter

    Hello, everyone! The end of the year is nearly here – how time flies!!! We held our Annual Conference in November and we are now wrapping up 2024 with our last newsletter of the year. We have some nice conference highlights for you and the usual interesting news.

    1. PSA Parliaments Annual Conference: Highlights
    2. Our UG Essay Competition Winners
    3. PSA Parliaments Membership and Survey
    4. Opportunities
    5. Calls for papers
    6. Urgent Questions
    7. Recent Publications
    8. On the Blog
    9. Overview of Parliaments Map

    If you have any notices/messages you would like us to circulate to our group, please let us know.

    Best wishes,

    Caroline, Diana, Ruxandra, Jack and Lauren

    1. PSA Parliaments Annual Conference: Highlights

    Last month, we held our Annual Conference and were absolutely delighted to welcome close to 50 participants for the main event. It was great to see so many familiar faces as well as new ones.

    On Thursday, 21 November, WISERD hosted us at Cardiff University for our early-career workshop. We then gathered at the Senedd for our traditional drinks reception with a special keynote by the Deputy Presiding Officer David Rees MS. This was followed by an informal dinner on the other side of the bay.

    On Friday, 22 November, the main conference took place in the beautiful Pierhead Building, featuring three exciting panels with very high-quality presentations throughout (as we were told by several attendees afterwards). We heard about a wide range of topics and had engaging discussions with many great questions form the audience. Massive thanks to the Senedd Cymru and their research unit for hosting us and sponsoring the lunch.

    Please see here for all the highlights!

    2. Our UG Essay Competition Winners

    At the conference, we also announced the winners of our annual undergraduate essay competition. We received many excellent submissions and the winning essays displayed an outstanding level of analysis. We thank Stephen Holden Bates (University of Birmingham) for being our external judge this year!

    The winner is Colin Wilson who was nominated by Philip Cowley of Queen Mary University of London. He wrote a “Parliamentary Studies Research Portfolio” with three mini-studies.

    The runner-up is Lola Clugston, nominated by Stephen Elstub of Newcastle University, for her essay on “Enhancing the Impact of Select Committees in the UK Parliament: A Focus on MP Engagement”.

    We are thrilled to award both students their well-deserved prizes of £100 and £50 and wish them best of luck for their postgraduate studies! Thank you and congratulations also to the nominating academics!

    You can read the judging panel’s feedback and both essays here.

    3. PSA Parliaments Membership and Survey

    PSA Parliaments membership

    If you like what we do and want to support our activities, please consider becoming a member of the UK Political Studies Association (PSA) if you have not already, and join us officially there. Or, if you think one of your colleagues would benefit from a PSA membership or from just receiving our newsletter, please spread the word (all information available here). Our membership figures (PSA members and newsletter subscribers) determine our budget and, thus, the activities we can offer.

    The PSA is currently looking into revising its membership structure and assessing the potential of introducing a new affiliate category. We, as a Specialist Group, are supportive of this idea and believe it may allow more of our non-PSA members, especially practitioners, to get involved. We will keep you updated.

    Members Survey

    We are conducting this survey to gather more viewpoints and wishes regarding our activities and events. This will help us to align our work closely with the expectations of our members while considering our limited resources. The results will be used to inform our planning process and guide us in setting our priorities for the next couple of years.

    Thank you for taking the time to fill this in!

    4. Opportunities

    Call by Modernisation Committee: Reminder

    We want to remind you that the new Modernisation Committee has launched a call for written submissions to hear from different groups, including academics. This is a great opportunity to feed your research findings into parliamentary reform.

    The deadline is 16 December 2024 and all the details can be found here.

    The UCL Public Policy team has provided useful tips on giving written and oral evidence to select committees here.

    PSA Women & Politics Specialist Groups Mid-Career Researcher Mentoring Programme 

    Are you a mid-career member of the PSA? The PSA Women & Politics SG is hosting a Mid-Career Researcher (MCR) Mentoring Programme tailored specifically to the needs of women in academia following a research track. This initiative responds to a critical need to address the career development of scholars beyond their first promotion, offering tailored support to navigate the challenges unique to mid-career professionals. 10 places are available, with bursary support provided towards travel and accommodation for each participant 

    Location: PSA office, Camden, London  | Dates: Thursday 23 January and Friday 24 January 2025 

    Apply to register by 5pm Monday 2nd December. 

    Find out more, including how to apply, here.

    5. Call for Papers

    4th Global Conference on Parliamentary Studies, Athens, Greece, Friday, 13 June 2025

    This is an opportunity  for academics, researchers and practitioners to explore “Reinventing Democracy for the 21st Century”. Set in the birthplace of democracy, this unique gathering invites thought leaders to address the challenges and opportunities of our time, where technology, media and geopolitical shifts intersect with democratic governance. 

    The conference is jointly organized by the Hellenic OCR Team and Széchenyi István University.

    Submit your abstract by 28 February 2025, and learn more about the event here. 

    6. Urgent Questions with Richard Whitaker

    Our popular Urgent Questions feature is back! Richard Whitaker, Professor of Politics at the University of Leicester and currently a Parliamentary Academic Fellow, has told us why the NHS is responsible for him choosing an academic career, about his passion for working in Parliament and – a familiar theme to our loyal readers – music.

    Watch out for the yellow jumper! You can read all of Rick’s answers here.

    7. Recent Publications

    If you would like your published research to be featured in this section, please email Caroline with details.

    8. On the Blog

    We would love to have more contributions on our blog. If you have an idea for a blog on some aspect of parliamentary study, please get in touch with our communications officer Jack.

    9. Overview of Parliaments Map

    For anybody who wishes to cover any of the countries not yet covered in our map, contact our communications officer Jack.