Author: psaparliaments

Categories
Blog

Calmed waters by a missed boat

A highly intelligent, well-informed report with clear recommendations has emerged from a Select Committee. ‘What is going on?’ asks Ray Snoddy

Reaction to the recommendations of the House of Commons Select Committees is usually in direct proportion to how outlandish they are.

Argue that it’s time to replace the BBC or privatise Channel 4 and heavy headlines are guaranteed.

Come up with well-argued, moderate recommendations, that after studying the full implications, the status quo should continue with the BBC licence fee surviving until at least 2038, and all is quiet.

The main reason for such a suggestion is that the Government has failed to come up with a workable alternative and has effectively run out of time.

The response has been muted, not least because newspapers like The Times, Daily Mail and the Sun, have been arguing for decades for the “reform” of the licence fee.

In recent years this has morphed into arguments for the abolition of the licence fee and its replacement by a form of voluntary subscription – just like Netflix.

It is the sort of attack that has come directly from Downing Street in the early days of the Johnson Premiership when Dominic Cummings was a power in the land.

Yet suddenly, the Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee’s report on the future of public service broadcasting comes-up with something so unexpectedly rooted in the status quo that it becomes positively radical.

The argument of the Select Committee can be summed-up in one weighty paragraph.

“It’s clear that the BBC TV licence has a limited shelf-life in a digital media landscape,” the central theme begins. So far so good. We all know that public service broadcasters are facing enormous competitive pressure from the streaming services and associated difficulty reaching young audiences.

“However, the Government has missed the boat to reform it. Instead of coming up with a workable alternative, it has sealed its own fate through a failure to develop a broadband infrastructure that would allow serious consideration of other means to fund the BBC,” the Committee argues.

The eleven-person panel chaired by Conservative Julian Knight, and with an inbuilt Conservative majority, looked at three main alternatives – household or individual fee, state budget funding, or subscription with supplementary taxation.

“None of these were sufficiently better as a whole to recommend as an alternative,” the Committee tellingly concludes.

It has not been shy to draw clear conclusion from its analysis either.

The Government now needs to come out with a clear alternative to the licence fee that it can put to Parliament – with the implication that none exists at the moment- or strongly support the current model for at least the next 10-year Charter period.

They go further. If there is no workable alternative at present then the Government should actually help the BBC in driving down evasion.

Where on earth could such a radical interpretation of the status quo have sprung from? A highly intelligent, well-informed report with clear recommendations has emerged from a Select Committee. What is going on?

A look at the personnel is revealing. No less than three of the six Conservatives have worked for the BBC at some stage in their careers and another is an actor. Damian Green, former deputy Prime Minister has worked for both the BBC and Channel 4.

Those seeking to undermine the BBC will cry fix. An alternative view is that some of those involved might actually know what they are talking about.

There is another aspect to the Committee membership. No less than five of the six Conservatives were for Remain, and that of course is a taint that excludes otherwise qualified people from the Cabinet – doubly so if they failed to support Boris Johnson for the leadership.

Could it be that refugees from this Government have, by default, helped to raise the quality of select committees?

If the licence fee is to continue through the next Charter period until 2038 then other implications click in as night follows day.

Almost by definition, the Communications Act 2003 is hopelessly out of date and needs to be urgently replaced. Despite the pandemic the Select Committee wants to see new legislation enacted before 2022.

In particular, if the current structure of public service broadcasting is to survive in anything like its present form then, as the Committee recommends, PSBs should have on screen prominence that goes beyond the current electronic programme guide.

As Carolyn McCall, chief executive of ITV has argued, if your audience cannot find your programmes the business ultimately cannot survive.

The Committee is also spot-on in arguing that the PSBs should also help themselves and not just rely on the Government by taking steps to maximise their own bargaining power in the digital age.

It suggests that the five PSBs should explore options for collaboration on a single on-demand video platform – rather like Project Kangaroo of blessed memory- and that Ofcom should offer support.

Surely that is another sensible suggestion from the Committee and would give the established broadcasters more of a chance in the never-ending battle with the multiple-billion California streaming services.

Will the Government take any notice of this well-grounded report?

Another truism about Select Committees, the more sensible they are, the more likely they are to be ignored.

But facts and technology are right behind the arguments. Subscription funding for the BBC will not be a practical option for years, and it may never be a good idea if you want to preserve a national broadcaster for all.

It is impossible because millions do not have the broadband connections and many millions more do not have the necessary black boxes.

Even if it were technically possible, the overall cost of broadband subscription, box and BBC subscription would be much higher than the current BBC licence fee.

As the Committee astutely suggests – the Government has already missed the boat in being able to bring in a workable alternative way of funding the BBC in time for the start of a new charter.

Common sense is slowing winning in the face of the initial Johnson/ Cummings attack on the BBC, complete with thoroughly bad ideas such as decriminalising the licence fee, something that has now been quietly dropped.

As Damian Green noted at the time of the Johnson/Cummings attacks, there was nothing in the Conservative manifesto about destroying the BBC.

You can be cynical about the output of Select Committees. Somewhere there must be a mountain of ignored and discarded reports.

This one could mark a turning point in the direction towards sanity.

This blog was originally published on Mediatel News. See the original post on their website.

Raymond Snoddy is a freelance writer and media consultant. He is the former media editor of @thetimes and @FT, and presenter of @newswatchbbc.

Categories
Urgent Questions

Professor Sarah Childs

SARAH CHILDS

Professor Sarah Childs is Professor of Politics & Gender at Royal Holloway, University of London. Her latest book is Feminist Democratic Representation, co-authored with Karen Celis and published by Oxford University Press in 2020. She also authored The Good Parliament Report in 2016.

Please tell us a little bit about how you entered academia and your academic career

As an undergraduate in politics I realised I hadn’t been able to learn enough about gender; I did a masters in Women’s studies and was signed up to start at PGCE… I realized I didn’t want to teach the Romans to 11 year olds… I had to look for a job – in those days the Guardian on a Wednesday – interviews for two PhDs places, I got offered the first at Kingston University, part-time with teaching; otherwise, I might have been a suffrage historian… I never wanted to be a British politics lecturer – I did politics in the school of African and Asian studies at Sussex… but my PhD years covered the 1997 election. I was supposed to be writing a theoretical PhD but I ended up interviewing 35 of the New Labour Women; and I loved talking to political actors.

Which five books/articles (written by someone else) have been most important to you in your academic career?

Benedict Anderson Imagined Communities – as an undergraduate, this book was like nothing I’d read before.

Vicky Randall Women and Politics – my first ever gender and politics book.

Anne Phillips The Politics of Presence – read as a Masters in Women’s Studies student, and started off my academic career.

Drude Dahlerup ‘From a Small to a Large Minority’, a key contribution to debates about critical mass.

Suzanne Dovi ‘Preferable Descriptive Representatives: Will Just Any Woman, Black, or Latino Do?’ – made me think harder about the practice of representation

Which person/people has/have been most influential/important to you in your academic career?

Joni Lovenduski and Vicky Randall – When I was a part-time PhD student in an old polytechnic on the verge of giving up, both told me that my research was worthwhile; thereafter I received the most amazing mentorship from Joni, and Vicky examined my PhD.

Rosie Campbell – co-author, co-jogger, and confidant.

Karen Celis – with whom I’ve just spent amazing three years writing a book, including two summers of intense writing in Italy with her.

Which of your own pieces of research are you most proud of?

Feminist Democratic Representation with Karen Celis. It was slow, intense and fun, and our first book of political theory.

‘The Substantive Representation of Women: Reducing the VAT on Sanitary Products in the UK’ in Parliamentary Affairs (2006) with Julie Withey. My favourite discrete case study.

What has been your greatest achievement in academia?

The Good Parliament Report 2016 + the pilot (2018) and then permanent change to Standing Orders to allow proxy voting for babyleave (2020).

What has been your greatest disappointment in academia?

Being told: (i) I would only get a serious job if I study a serious subject (i.e. not gender); and (ii) I would only get a pay rise if I received a job offer from another institution.

What is the first or most important thing you tell your students about parliaments?

To understand them you need to speak to folks who inhabit them, week in-week out, both political and administrative.

Where were you born, where did you grow up, and where do you live now?

Hartley Wintney and Hook, in Hampshire – school was local but sixth form college was in Basingstoke. I have lived in Clapham since the early 1990s. I had to get away from village life where everyone knows your business.

What was your first job?

I worked in a sweet shop on Saturdays whilst at school and then Boots the Chemist as a sixth former.  

What was the toughest job you ever had?

I worked in an industrial laundry on a machine that would send down hangers on which I would hang soggy men’s overalls, all day. I have never been so physically exhausted. After a week I fortunately got a pub job that meant I could leave.

What are your hobbies?

Running with my little brother (virtually if not in person); personal training; swimming. None of these in an extreme way but regularly; and reading.

What are your favourite novels?

The Blind Assassin, Margaret Atwood.

The Poisonwood Bible, Barbara Kingsolver

Amrita, Banana Yoshimoto

What is your favourite music?

Blue Lines, Massive Attack. Reminds me of friends, gigs, and (many strong) women’s voices.

Home by Hania Rani. During the pandemic this was really relaxing

What are your favourite artists?

Georgia O’keefe, especially her flowers. Edward Hopper, I look at this picture every day, and I love the water.

What is your favourite film?

Secrets and Lies, Mike Leigh. Best representation of PMT ever seen on film… IMHO.

What is your favourite building?

Falling Water, when I visited as a teenager I was blown away by it.

What is your favourite tv show?

During Covid: Schitt’s Creek

What is your favourite holiday destination?

Iceland: spas, thermal swimming pools, mountains, snow, and clean air.

What is your favourite sport?

I guess football to watch – best memories of Granddad (Tottenham) and dad, and still watch with little bro and partner (both Gooners).

Boothroyd or Bercow?

Bercow on gender/diversity sensitive reforms.

Restoration or Renewal?

Both, but former without latter will be irrelevant to the better working of the institution.

Cat or Dog?

Neither.

Fish and chips or Curry?

Both, at least once a month.

Planes, trains or automobiles?

The Eurostar to Brussels.

Scones: Devonshire or Cornish Method?

I don’t need the cream.

And, finally, a question asked by 8-year-old Seth: Would you rather have chips for fingers, or chocolate eclairs for thumbs??

Chips  – I think the chocolate eclairs will drip chocolate and cream on my clothes… and I like clothes too much.

Categories
News

April 2021 Newsletter

We hope that you are safe and well. We have some updates for you:

  1. Reminder about our PSA Parliaments Survey: The State of Parliamentary & Legislative Studies
  2. PSA Parliaments at #PSA21
  3. PSA Parliaments Panel on Innovations in Theory and Method in Parliamentary Studies
  4. Urgent (and Not-So-Urgent) Questions with Sarah Childs
  5. New Overviews of Parliaments Added to our Website
  6. Webinar for Prospective PhD Students in Parliamentary Studies
  7. EUGenDem Parliamentary Ethnography Workshop & Book Launch
  8. Jobs & PhD Opportunities!
  9. Petition: Save Kingston Politics Department
  10. Recent Publications that have Caught our Eye
  11. Recently on the Blog

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

1. Reminder about our PSA Parliaments Survey: The State of Parliamentary & Legislative Studies

We have already received over 150 responses to our survey on research in parliamentary and legislative studies.

The purpose of the survey is to map the sub-discipline and to identify any trends and absences.

If you haven’t filled it in yet, there is still plenty of time. The survey will remain open until the end of May.

We will be presenting the initial findings at 2pm on Wednesday 9th June 2021 as part of our roundtable on the past, present and future of parliamentary studies. Book your ticket now!

2. PSA Parliaments at #PSA21

PSA Parliaments had a very successful time at the annual PSA Conference, even if we do say so ourselves!

We organised four excellent panels on parliaments and the pandemic, representation and diversity, parliamentary relations and powers, and questions, content and language in parliamentary proceedings.

A full report will be produced for next month’s newsletter.

3. PSA Parliaments Panel on Innovations in Theory and Method in Parliamentary Studies

Due to the PSA Annual Conference and the Easter Holidays, our online panel is taking a well earned break this month. Don’t worry though – we’ll be back on Wednesday May 12th at 2pm.

For our penultimate panel of the year, we’ll be focusing on innovations in theory and method in parliamentary studies and our speakers are:

  • James Strong on “Studying parliament’s past to understand its future”;
  • Stephen Holden Bates on “Re-structuring parliamentary roles”;
  • Caroline Bhattacharya on “New methodological approaches to party unity and discursive contestation”; and
  • Felicity Matthews on “The Democratic Ecology of Parliamentary e-Petitions: A Case Study of the UK Petitions Committee Online Abuse Inquiry”

All panels are free and all are welcome but please register beforehand in order to gain details of how to access the event.

Recordings of past presentations, including from last month’s excellent panel on parliaments and social media, can be found on the PSA Parliaments YouTube Channel.

4. Urgent (and Not-So-Urgent) Questions with Sarah Childs

We are very pleased to announce that Professor Sarah Childs is the fourth interviewee for our new feature, Urgent (and Not-So-Urgent) Questions, where scholars and practitioners in the field answer questions about their life, their academic career, their interests, and other less serious questions.

Please visit our website now to find out about her job in an industrial laundry, whether she’s a Hotspur or a Gooner, and whether she’ll be the first respondent not to say that the Palace of Westminster is their favourite building!

If you would like to see someone answer our urgent and not-so-urgent questions, then please let us know.

5. New Overviews of Parliaments Added to our Website

We have recently added three new overviews of parliaments to our website.

Many thanks to Mark Egan, Roberto Cabrera-Tapia, and Andreja Pegan & Alenka Krašovec for their respective overviews of Jersey, Chile and Slovenia.

If you would like to write an overview for one of the countries or jurisdictions not covered on our maps, then please get in touch.

6. Webinar for Prospective PhD Students in Parliamentary Studies

PSA Parliaments have organised a webinar for prospective PhD students who are interested in parliamentary and legislative studies. The webinar will take place at 2pm on Monday April 19th 2021.

More details, and how to sign up, can be found here.

Please spread the word to any undergraduate and MA students you may know!

7. EUGenDem Parliamentary Ethnography Workshop & Book Launch

Our good friends at EUGenDem are holding their last spring workshop on parliamentary ethnography, featuring talks by Emma Crewe and Sarah Childs.

The workshop will be followed by a book launch of Cherry Miller’s monograph Gendering the Everyday in the UK House of Commons: Beneath the Spectacle, which is based on her prize-winning thesis. The book will be introduced by the author herself and then discussed by Marc Geddes (late of this parish).

Full details of the workshop and book launch can be found here.

8. Jobs & PhD Opportunities!

Lectureships at the University of Birmingham

The Department of Political Science & International Studies at the University of Birmingham is advertising several positions at lecturer and senior lecturer level.

It’s an open call, although the department would particularly welcome applications from those working in the areas of Representation, Accountability and Democracy; Race and Ethnicity; Gender; and Data and Technology.

Full details can be found here of how to apply to work in a friendly, intellectually-vibrant department in the best city in the world where the sun always shines (OK, that’s enough now – Ed.).

Policy Analyst, Lords Constitution Committee

The House of Lords Constitution Select Committee is hiring a policy analyst.

Full details can be found here.

PhD scholarships at the Centre for Democratic Engagement, University of Leeds

The Centre for Democratic Engagement invites applications from motivated students with PhD proposals reflecting our areas of expertise in advance of upcoming scholarship deadlines.

Information on how to apply is here.

The Centre for Democratic Engagement is able to support candidates for both University-funded Leeds Doctoral Scholarships and the School’s own Politics of Global Challenges Doctoral Scholarships:

Please direct informal queries to Professor Cristina Leston-Bandeira.

9. Petition: Save Kingston Politics Department

The Politics & IR department at Kingston University is under threat of closure.

Please see here for a joint statement by PSA, BISA and UACES on the risks to the study of Politics and International Relations and please see here for a petition to save the department, which, at the time of writing, had already received over 1,700 signatures.

10. Recent Publications that have Caught our Eye

James Strong has published an article in Parliamentary Studies called “Did Theresa May Kill the War Powers Convention? Comparing Parliamentary Debates on UK Intervention in Syria in 2013 and 2018”.

David Judge has recently published two articles: “Walking the dark side: evading parliamentary scrutiny” in Political Quarterly, and “Why it matters to keep asking why legislatures matter” with Cristina Leston-Bandeira in the Journal of Legislative Studies.

Cherry Miller’s article “Parliamentary ethnography and feminist institutionalism: gendering institutions – but how?” has been published on fast track by the European Journal of Politics & Gender.

Jorge Fernandes, Thomas Saalfeld and Carsten Schwemmer have published an article on the politics of select committee assignments in the British House of Commons in Legislative Studies Quarterly.

Jessica Smith (with Sarah Childs)has published a report Remotely Representative Parliament: Lesson Learning from the Hybrid Parliament with the Centenary Action Group and the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust.

A new issue of Legislative Studies Quarterly has been published.

And, finally, not a publication but our co-convenor, Alexandra Meakin, appeared on Today in Parliament to talk about the Restoration and Renewal of the Palace of Westminster.

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

11. Recently on the Blog

Our blog is still taking a breather but we’ll hopefully be back in April.

If you have an idea for a blog on some aspect of parliamentary study please get in touch with our communications officer, Gavin Hart.

Categories
News

March 2021 Newsletter

We hope that you are safe and well. We have some updates for you:

  1. PSA Parliaments Survey: The State of Parliamentary & Legislative Studies
  2. PSA Parliaments Panel on Analysing Representation
  3. PSA21: Register Now!
  4. Urgent (and Not-So-Urgent) Questions with Michael Rush
  5. Webinar for Prospective PhD Students in Parliamentary Studies
  6. Upcoming Events: Diversity Sensitive Parliaments Seminar & EUGenDem Workshops
  7. Jobs in Poland and the University of Cambridge
  8. Call for Chapters: Doing Fieldwork in Centres of Power
  9. Recent Publications that have Caught our Eye
  10. Recently on the Blog

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

1. PSA Parliaments Survey: The State of Parliamentary & Legislative Studies

We are very pleased to announce the launch of our survey on research in parliamentary and legislative studies.

The purpose of the survey is to map the sub-discipline and to identify any trends and absences.

We encourage all our members who undertake research on (any aspect of) parliaments and legislatures to fill it in.

We will be presenting the initial findings at 2pm on Wednesday 9th June 2021 as part of our roundtable on the past, present and future of parliamentary studies. Book your ticket now!

2. PSA Parliaments Panel on Analysing Representation

Acting as a scholarly oasis in the arid dessert of pandemic-ridden UK academia, this month’s PSA Parliaments panel is at 2pm on Wednesday 10th March.

We’ll be focusing on representation and our speakers are:

  • Rebecca McKee on “Who works for MPs? Representation in the House of Commons”
  • Sardar Aziz on “Iraqi Kurdistan Parliament: stuck in the middle”
  • Wang Leung Ting on “Professional Representation: The Effects of Prior Occupation on MPs’ Attention on Policies”
  • Fotis Fitsilis on “Digital Tools to Bridge the Representation Gap”

All panels are free and all are welcome but please register beforehand in order to gain details of how to access the event.

Recordings of past presentations, including from last month’s excellent panel on parliaments and social media, can be found on the PSA Parliaments YouTube Channel.

3. PSA21: Register Now!

There are only four weeks to go until the start of the Political Studies Association Annual International Conference, PSA21, which will be taking place virtually this year.

We have four fantastic panels for you, featuring cutting edge research on parliaments and legislatures from around the world.

Take a look at our updated papers and panels list and register now!

4. Urgent (and Not-So-Urgent) Questions with Michael Rush

We are very pleased to announce that Professor Michael Rush is the third interviewee for our new feature, Urgent (and Not-So-Urgent) Questions, where scholars and practitioners in the field answer questions about their life, their academic career, their interests, and other less serious questions.

Please visit our website now to find out the reason why the Public Accounts Committee features in his greatest disappointments, why there is only one way to eat a scone, and whether he’ll be the first respondent not to say that the Palace of Westminster is their favourite building!

We must also apologise to last month’s interviewee, Christine Leston-Bandeira, for including a wrong link to her answers in last month’s newsletter. To read her answers, please click on this link.

If you would like to see someone answer our urgent and not-so-urgent questions, then please let us know.

5. Webinar for Prospective PhD Students in Parliamentary Studies

PSA Parliaments have organised a webinar for prospective PhD students who are interested in parliamentary and legislative studies.

The webinar will take place on Monday 19th April at 2pm and the panel features Margaret Arnott, Sarah Childs and Marc Geddes.

More details, and how to sign up, can be found here.

Please spread the word to any undergraduate and MA students you may know!

6. Upcoming Events: Diversity Sensitive Parliaments Seminar & EUGenDem Workshops

The Global Diversities and Inequalities Research Centre at London Metropolitan University is running a seminar on Diversity Sensitive Parliaments on Wednesday March 24th 2021.

More details, including how to register, can be found here.

The EUGenDem project is organising two virtual workshops in March as part of its series on Gender, democracy and polarized politics in Europe.

  1. Gendering Representative Institutions: Actors, Inner Lives, and Political Struggles on 12 March 2021 at 11am (Eastern European Time);
  2. Democratic backsliding in Europe and the opposition to gender equality on 17 March 2021 at 11am (Eastern European Time).

Please click on the titles above for full details of the workshops, including how to register.

7. Jobs in Poland and at the University of Cambridge

The Willy Brandt Centre for German and European Studies at the University of Wrocław, Poland, is seeking to appoint a full-time postdoctoral researcher for the research project “Democracy in pandemic times: towards a decline or a new form of representative democracy? (PANDEMO)”.

More details about the postdoc, including how to apply, can be found here.

The Bennett Institute for Public Policy at the University of Cambridge is seeking a Research Assistant/Associate to support a research project led by Professor Michael Kenny, exploring the British state’s approach to devolution across the UK since 1999, and contemporary pressures upon the domestic union in the wake of Brexit and Covid-19.

More details about the position, including how to apply, can be found here.

8. Call for Chapters: Doing Fieldwork in Centres of Power

Jonathan Chibois (IIAC, France) and Samuel Shapiro (Université Laval, Canada) are planning to publish an edited collection entitled Doing Fieldwork in Centres of Power: The Example of Deliberative Bodies.

The aim of the book will be to examine the methodological and epistemological challenges of field research in centres of power. The editors are seeking contributions from both young and experienced researchers, from all continents, as well as from different academic disciplines.

Full details of the edited collection, including how to submit your proposal for a chapter can be found here.

9. Recent Publications that have Caught our Eye

The Westminster Foundation for Democracy has recently published two reports, both by Franklin De Vrieze and Luka Glušac.

  1. Combatting corruption capably: An assessment framework for parliament’s interaction with anti-corruption agencies;
  2. It’s complicated: Parliament’s relationship with anti-corruption agencies in Indonesia, Pakistan, and the Maldives.

And a new issue of both the Journal of Legislative Studies has been published.

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

10. Recently on the Blog

Our blog is taking a breather while we do some homeschooling and catch up with the extra marking and teaching preparation that has been foisted upon us because of UK Higher Education’s masterful response to the pandemic.

We’ll hopefully be back in March firing on all cylinders!

If you have an idea for a blog on some aspect of parliamentary study please get in touch with our communications officer, Gavin Hart.

Categories
Urgent Questions

Professor Michael Rush

MICHAEL RUSH

Professor Michael Rush is Emeritus Professor of Politics at the University of Exeter. He is the author of The Role of the Member of Parliament Since 1868: from Gentlemen to Players, published by Oxford University Press in 2001, and is the driving force behind the Parliamentary Archive of MPs, 1832-present.

Please tell us a little bit about how you entered academia and your academic career

I started as an undergraduate at Sheffield studying for a degree in history and politics, graduating in 1964. I was then awarded a Sheffield University Postgraduate Scholarship and was awarded my PhD in politics in 1966. I regarded myself as very fortunate to be at university at a time when only 4.2 per cent of the 18+ age group were studying for a degree. I then became a beneficiary of the post-Robbins expansion of universities. The post at Exeter was the third for which I had been shortlisted in the space of a few months in 1964. I remained at Exeter until my retirement in 2003, having been appointed to a personal chair in 1994. However, I spent a year on a teaching exchange at the University of Western Ontario in 1967-68, did summer school teaching at Acadia University, Wolfeville, Nova Scotia, and had visiting research fellowships at Carleton University, Ottawa and the University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.

Which five books/articles (written by someone else) have been most important to you in your academic career?

Harold Lasswell, Who Gets What, When How, 1936.

Lewis Namier, Politics at the Accession of George III1958.

Bernard Crick, In Defence of Politics, 1962.

Bernard Crick, The Reform of Parliament, 1964.

W.G. Runciman, Social Science and Political Theory, 1965.

Which person/people has/have been most influential/important to you in your academic career?

Bill Thornhill, Stuart Walkland and Jack Hayward, taught me as an undergraduate at Sheffield; Bill was also my PhD supervisor; Sammy Finer, my external examiner; Bernard Crick and many official and academic members of the Study of Parliament Group; Victor Wiseman, my first head of department; and Henry Mayo, chair of the Department of political Science at the University of Western Ontario, from whom I learned some very useful things about being a head of department.

Which of your own pieces of research are you most proud of?

The Role of the Member if Parliament: from Gentlemen to Players, OUP, 2001.

Parliamentary Socialisation: Learning the Ropes or Determining Behaviour? (co-authored with Philip Giddings), Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.

What has been your greatest achievement in academia?

Working closely other academics and parliamentary officials through the Study of Parliament Group to extend and enhance our knowledge and understanding of the UK Parliament.

What has been your greatest disappointment in academia?

Running out of time!  After I retired in 2003, I continued to research and publish, but conducting research and writing up the results eventually became too onerous, but that left unstarted projects I would have liked to have undertaken, such as a study of the Public Accounts Committee, which has not been the subject of major research since Basil Chubb’s book published in 1952.

What is the first or most important thing you tell your students about parliaments?

The need to understand enough about the history and political culture of the country concerned to understand its legislature (and, indeed, its politics).

Where were you born, where did you grow up, and where do you live now?

I was born and grew up in Richmond, Surrey. I moved to Exeter in 1964 and have lived there ever since.

What was your first job?

Gardener with Richmond Borough Council between leaving school and doing national service and subsequently as an undergraduate during university summer vacations.

What was the toughest job you ever had?

Being Head of Department.  This was not because my colleagues were in the least bit difficult; on the contrary, they were always most supportive.  However, as HoD my time was inevitably fragmented and in my 7 years in the job the responsibilities increased substantially.

What are your hobbies?

Gardening, exploring family history, reading historical and political biographies, reading novels, listening to classical music, walking.

What are your favourite novels?

Jane Austen, Pride and Prejudice (beautifully written & a wonderful picture of early 19th century social life); Anthony Trollope’s political novels (good tales well-told & a superb on mid-19th century politics); Robert Graves, I, Claudius & Claudius the God, 1934 (bring ancient Rome alive).

What is your favourite music?

Beethoven, Symphony No. 9 (The Choral) (majestic); Vaughan Williams, Variations on a Theme by Thomas Tallis (wonderfully evocative).

What are your favourite pieces of artwork?

W.J.M. Turner & David Hockney (I just do!).

What is your favourite film?

Citizen Kane (still resonates).

What is your favourite building?

Salisbury Cathedral – sheer elegance; Palace of Westminster – professional interest!

What is your favourite tv show?

Brideshead Revisited (good story, beautifully acted), Yes Minister & Yes Prime Minister (need I say?).

What is your favourite holiday destination?

Italy (beautiful scenery, lovely people, good food).

What is your favourite sport?

Rugby union (watched Richmond, London Scottish, London Welsh, and Rosslyn Park as a boy & later played for a minor club). Tennis (good exercise).

Boothroyd or Bercow?

Boothroyd.

Restoration or Renewal?

Both, but, as Joad used to say, ‘It depends what you mean by…’!

Cat or Dog?

Cat.

Fish and chips or Curry?

Curry.

Planes, trains or automobiles?

Trains.

Scones: Devonshire or Cornish Method?

My paternal grandmother coming from Morchard Bishop, near Crediton, it’s no contest!

And, finally, a question asked by 8-year-old Seth: Would you rather eat mushy peas in orange juice, or mushrooms in golden syrup?

I like all four, but, forced to choose, it’s the first, but I have a question for you Seth: Do you like kippers and jam? I had a cousin who claims he did!

Categories
News

February 2021 Newsletter

We hope that you are safe and well. We have some updates for you:

  1. PSA Parliaments Panel on Analysing Legislative Scrutiny & Behaviour
  2. Urgent (and Not-So-Urgent) Questions with Cristina Leston-Bandeira
  3. New Constitution Unit Report on Control of Parliamentary Time
  4. UK Study of Parliament Group Publication on Parliaments and the Pandemic
  5. Book Launch: Parliaments and Post-Legislative Scrutiny
  6. Recent Publications that have Caught our Eye
  7. Recently on the Blog

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

1. PSA Parliaments Panel on Analysing Legislative Scrutiny & Behaviour

Acting as an intellectual beacon in the desolation and darkness of pandemic-ridden UK academia, this month’s PSA Parliaments panel is at 2pm on Wednesday 10th February.

We’ll be focusing on the impact of legislative scrutiny and behaviour and our speakers are:

  • Nokwazi Makanya on “Progress in parliamentary ‘power over the purse’: the case of South Africa”;
  • Andrew Jones on “Managing coalition government in an upper house: testing the ‘keeping tabs’ theory in the House of Lords 2010-15”;
  • Jack Sheldon on “Standing up for the nations and regions? Patterns of sub-state territorial representation in the UK House of Commons, 1992-2019”; and
  • Margaret Arnott on “Interparliamentary Relations in the Devolved UK – Democratic Scrutiny & Accountability”.

All panels are free and all are welcome but please register beforehand in order to gain details of how to access the event.

Recordings of past presentations, including from last month’s excellent panel on parliaments and social media, can be found on the PSA Parliaments YouTube Channel.

2. Urgent (and Not-So-Urgent) Questions with Cristina Leston-Bandeira

We are very pleased to announce that Professor Cristina Leston-Bandeira is the second interviewee for our new feature, Urgent (and Not-So-Urgent) Questions, where scholars and practitioners in the field answer questions about their life, their academic career, their interests, and other less serious questions.

Hurry over to our website now to find out what she looked like as a small child, what style of ballroom dancing she prefers, and the reason she left Portugal for Hull!

If you would like to see someone answer our urgent and not-so-urgent questions, then please let us know.

3. New Constitution Unit Report on Control of Parliamentary Time

The Constitution Unit have published a new report by Meg Russell and Daniel Gover called Taking Back Control. The report argues that the House of Commons should govern its own time, and makes proposals for wresting such control from government.

More details, and the full report, can be found here.

4. UK Study of Parliament Group Publication on Parliaments and the Pandemic

The UK Study of Parliament Group (SPG) has published a collection of essays reflecting on the experience of parliaments in coping with the COVID-19 pandemic during 2020. The essays examine how parliaments innovated and adapted their working practices to cope with the restrictions imposed by the pandemic, and also consider the impact of COVID-19 on their ability to fulfil their roles of legislating, facilitating debate and holding government to account.

The essays focus mainly on Westminster and the UK’s devolved legislatures but also document the experience of the Crown dependencies and the New Zealand and Bahrain legislatures.

More details, and the collection of essays, can be found here.

5. Book Launch: Parliaments and Post-Legislative Scrutiny

The Westminster Foundation for Democracy are hosting a panel discussion on Post-Legislative Scrutiny to help launch the book Parliaments and Post-Legislative Scrutiny, published by Routledge, and edited by Franklin De Vrieze and Lord Norton.

Panellists will discuss the key principles and practices of this innovative practice, sharing lessons from their own experience.

The event is co-hosted by Agora, the University of Hull, and your very own friendly neighbourhood PSA specialist group, PSA Parliaments.

More details of the event, including how to register, can be found here.

6. Recent Publications that have Caught our Eye

Andrew Gamble has published an intellectual memoir of Michael Moran, who died in 2018 and whose work will be familiar to many of us.

New issues of both Parliamentary Affairs and Government and Opposition have been published.

And finally for this month, Lucy Kinski has published a new book European Representation in EU National Parliaments as part of the Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics book series.

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

7. Recently on the Blog

Thanks, once again, for the great contributions made to our blog by group members and from our wider network of scholars and policy-makers. Some of our recent blogs include:

PMQs: quieter and more civilised but not more accountable by Stephane Revillet

Why it’s difficult to interview MPs – and how best to do it anyway by Philip Cowley

If you have an idea for a blog on some aspect of parliamentary study please get in touch with our communications officer, Gavin Hart.

Categories
News

January 2021 newsletter

We hope that you are keeping safe and well and that 2021 is going to be, in general, better than 2020. We have a lot of updates for you:

  1. PSA Parliaments Panel on the Impact of Digital Technologies and Social Media on Parliaments
  2. PSA Parliaments Panels at PSA Annual Conference, Belfast
  3. Urgent (and Not-So-Urgent) Questions with Philip Norton
  4. Women in Legislative Studies Initiative
  5. Request for Help on Research Project about MPs and Parliamentary Party Groups
  6. Volunteers Needed for Prospective Parliamentary Studies PhD Students Webinar
  7. Call for Papers: ECPR General Conference, Innsbruck
  8. Nominations Wanted for PSA Prizes
  9. PSA Parliaments YouTube Channel
  10. Recent Publications that have Caught our Eye
  11. Recently on the Blog

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

1. PSA Parliaments Panel on the Impact of Digital Technologies and Social Media on Parliaments

What better way can there be to start 2021 than by attending the third panel of our Online Annual Conference at 2pm on Wednesday 13th January?

We’ll be focusing on the impact of digital technologies and social media on parliaments and our speakers are:

  • Ben Worthy and Stefani Langehennig on “Who is monitoring Parliament?”;
  • John Bryden on “How does Facebook influence parliament?”;
  • Sue Griffiths, Greg Power and Emily Death on “International approaches to virtual parliaments”; and
  • Abel François, Benjamin Monnery and Olivier Rozenberg on “Members of Parliament go back to school: A natural experiment of relative performance feedback and parliamentary activities in the French Parliament”.

All panels are free and all are welcome but please register beforehand in order to gain details of how to access the event.

2. PSA Parliaments Panels at PSA Annual Conference, Belfast

We are very pleased to announce details of our five panels at the PSA Annual Conference.

This year the conference is taking place online between the 29th and 31st March.

Registration is now open. We look forward to seeing you virtually!

3. Urgent (and Not-So-Urgent) Questions with Philip Norton

We are very pleased to announce that Professor Philip Lord Norton of Louth is the very first interviewee for our new feature, Urgent (and Not-So-Urgent) Questions, where scholars and practitioners in the field answer questions about their life, their academic career, their interests, and other less serious questions.

Hurry over to our website now to find out who the most important people have been in Philip’s career, in which country he had a four-man bodyguard, and whether he prefers trains, planes or automobiles!

If you would like to see someone answer our urgent and not-so-urgent questions, then please let us know.

4. Women in Legislative Studies Initiative

A new initiative has been launched called Women in Legislative Studies.

The group is for women and non-binary scholars who have or are pursuing a PhD in political science (or related field) who research legislative politics broadly defined. Their mission statement is: “To engage, support, and promote women who study legislative politics”.

More details about the group and how to join can be found at their website.

5. Request for Help on Research Project about MPs and Parliamentary Party Groups

Prof. Gidi Rahat (Hebrew University) and Dr Chen Friedberg (Israel Democracy Institute) are undertaking some research on the roles of MPs and parliamentary party groups. As part of this project, they are running a questionnaire and are seeking a country expert to complete it on the UK.

If you are knowledgeable about parliamentary party groups in the UK Parliament and are interested in taking part in the research project, then please contact Chen directly.

6. Volunteers Needed for Prospective Parliamentary Studies PhD Students Webinar

PSA Parliaments are hoping to run one or two webinars during 2021 aimed at prospective PhD students who are interested in studying parliamentary studies at doctoral level.

If you would like to be on the panel offering advice and answering questions, please email Stephen.

We are particularly interested in recruiting current PhD students as panel volunteers, especially those who come from backgrounds under-represented in both the sub-discipline and political science more broadly. All volunteers who are PhD students will be paid for their time.

7. Call for Papers: ECPR General Conference, Innsbruck

The call for panels and papers for the next ECPR General Conference in Innsbruck (31 August-3 September 2021) is now online.

The ECPR Standing Group of Parliaments is happy to endorse the section “Parliaments under Pressure: Advances and Challenges in Parliamentary Research”. Please see here for more information.

If you would like to organise a panel or present a paper, please submit proposals through the webpage. The deadline for panel & paper proposals is February 10th 2021.

8. Nominations Wanted for PSA Prizes

The PSA are seeking nominations for their various prizes. Please consider nominating someone by the deadline of January 18th.

We are not going to nominate ourselves for best specialist group because of the comparative lull in activity during the pandemic. However, we are going to go all out to win it in 2022!

9. PSA Parliaments YouTube Channel

PSA Parliaments now has its own YouTube Channel where you can catch up with all the presentations from our online conference, including from last month’s excellent panel on analysing PMQs.

10. Recent Publications that have Caught our Eye

Following on from theme of our second on-line conference panel, two articles have recently been published on PMQs and holding Prime Ministers to account.

Ruxandra Serban’s article “How are prime ministers held to account? Exploring procedures and practices in 31 parliamentary democracies” has been published in the Journal of Legislative Studies, as has Alan Convery, Pavielle Haines, James Mitchell and David Parker’s article “Questioning scrutiny: the effect of Prime Minister’s Questions on citizen efficacy and trust in parliament”.

An interesting new dataset can be discovered via the pages of Government and Opposition. Tobias Remschel and Corinna Kroeber have published “Every Single Word: A New Data Set Including All Parliamentary Materials Published in Germany”.

And finally for this month, Michelle Caplan, Nicole McMahon and Christopher Alcantara have published “Representing the Constituency: Institutional Design and Legislative Behaviour”.

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

11. Recently on the Blog

Thanks, once again, for the great contributions made to our blog by group members and from our wider network of scholars and policy-makers. Some of our recent blogs include:

Parliaments and COVID-19: principles and practice; challenges and opportunities by Meg Russell

Parliaments and Peacebuilding by Rosie Frost

If you have an idea for a blog on some aspect of parliamentary study please get in touch with our communications officer, Gavin Hart.

Categories
Urgent Questions

Professor Cristina Leston-Bandeira

CRISTINA LESTON-BANDEIRA

Professor Cristina Leston-Bandeira is Professor of Politics at the University of Leeds. She is Co-Director of the Centre for Democratic Engagement, Chair of the UK Study of Parliament Group, and the co-editor of the journal Parliamentary Affairs

Please tell us a little bit about how you entered academia and your academic career

I first entered academia back in Portugal, through Research Assistance temporary jobs and teaching. But I interrupted this by working in an opinion poll company, deciding eventually that actually I really wanted to do a PhD as I enjoyed in-depth research far too much to stay at a poll company; at which time I came to the UK thanks to a British Chevening Scholarship, fully convinced I’d head back to Portugal once the PhD was done. Twenty-seven years later I’m still here… In the UK I carried on being involved in research projects as a PhD student, thanks to my contacts with teams in Portugal, and taught the odd seminar for Lord Norton’s fab class on Comparative Legislatures, demonstrating to British students how amazing(ly puzzling) the Portuguese parliament was;-). In the meanwhile started my family (first son born half way through PhD; second one born a week after PhD Viva; third one at the start of my first lectureship job), so was somewhat constrained of where I could go/apply for, as my husband had a good job at Hull Uni (different field) and commuting would have been very difficult. Got a temporary lectureship at Hull University, eventually turned into a permanent one. I was looking at photos the other day with my youngest son of when he was a toddler and noticed how worn out I looked then! I look back and I have no idea how I did it, but when I started my first lectureship I also became Admissions Tutor, had to develop, lead and teach a new research methods for all 2nd year students, whilst also leading another compulsory module for first years and introduce an (as it happens first in the UK) MA fully taught online; and my youngest didn’t sleep through until he was 2. No wonder I looked completely worn out then. Stayed at Hull until 2015, by which time I’d become professor, before moving on to Leeds Uni.

Which five books/articles (written by someone else) have been most important to you in your academic career?

In no particular order:

Politics as a Vocation, Max Weber (I’m sorry, but I’m actually a sociologist, not a political scientist… when I did my undergraduate studies, Politics didn’t exist as a degree in Portugal, effects of 48 years of dictatorship).

The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life, Erving Goffman

The Differentiation of Society, Niklas Luhmann

Legislatures in Developmental Perspective, Allan Kornberg and Lloyd D. Musolf (eds.)

Does Parliament Matter?, Philip Norton – incidentally, this book is the reason I came to the UK. I remember so well seeing it in the library of the Constitutional Court in Lisbon and thinking: this is what I want to do for my PhD, does parliament matter (and obviously, why;)). I went straight to the British Council to try to find a postal address for this Philip Norton… these were the years before the internet. Found out he was in this place called Hull. Wrote him a letter asking if I could do my PhD with him, he replied, yes sure; got a grant, off I went to glorious Hull. Imagine if he had said no;-).

Which person/people has/have been most influential/important to you in your academic career?

Tricky one but in terms of influential I’m going for my mum (which would probably surprise her). Not because she’s done anything in particular towards my career or even knows much about what I do (and much less about academia). But because of the sort of woman she is. She’s not your standard mum, but she’s pretty phenomenal. Incredibly hard-worker, very strong work ethics, thinks outside the box and always saw what others wouldn’t, very open-minded and adaptable. Without explicitly teaching me, I know that a lot of my resilience and adaptability come from her, and those have been key in my career. And from my grandma, another amazing woman, I got the love for teaching. My father also influenced me a lot, we were very close; he also loved his teaching (he was a professor in demography), and no doubt my interest for research comes from him.

Most important definitely my husband – I wouldn’t have been able to do half of the things I’ve done without my better half; but then again I wouldn’t have married him, if I didn’t know he’d be my better half;-).

Which of your own pieces of research are you most proud of?

Ah, hmm. I’m very proud of my PhD (From Legislation to Legitimation: the Role of the Portuguese Parliament), still today. Although not actual research as such, I’m very proud of the Exploring Parliament book I co-edited with Louise Thompson, for lots of reasons, but primarily because it combines three of favourite work things (pedagogy, parliament and working with officials) (ok, four things: and working with Louise). I’m also very proud of my article with David Judge on the ‘Institutional Representation of Parliament’ (in Political Studies), again for lots of reasons, but mainly because it was the culmination of a process of true academic discussion, reflection, research, collaboration and exchange of ideas. In an increasingly individualistic academic environment, it’s a privilege to actually have such a collaborative experience of exchanging and refining ideas.

What has been your greatest achievement in academia?

Oh, no idea, you tell me. Though two things I’m very proud of: the fact I’m a National Teaching Fellow and, together with Louise Thompson, to have transformed the PSA Parliaments specialist group at the time from a small and practically inactive group, to one of the largest and most active ones, and with a legacy that lasts today still.

What has been your greatest disappointment in academia?

Dealing with deceitful people. Can’t stand deceit.

What is the first or most important thing you tell your students about parliaments?

To look into it by themselves, rather than believing what others say about parliament.

Where were you born, where did you grow up, and where do you live now?

I was born in Paris (as in Paris, France, not Paris, Texas;)). My parents had been lucky enough to get scholarships to study in France and get out of Portugal, where there was a dictatorship. They met in Paris. A few years later I was born. We stayed there until the revolution in Portugal, I was about 4. My mum was on the first flight back to Portugal as soon as the airport opened. The revolution happened in April, by June they had left their (fab) jobs in Paris, made an auction of most of their stuff and gone to Portugal. I only spoke French until then, didn’t say a word for a month, and when I started speaking again, it came out in Portuguese. My parents were very political, so I was brought up between political demonstrations, party meetings and feminist gatherings. My mum would eventually become an MP and Minister; my father at one point actually created his own party, and created the trade union for higher education in Portugal. It’s not your “typical” Portuguese upbringing… and no surprise that I ended up obsessed with politics and parliament in particular (especially as my grandma, to whom I was very close, was also into her politics). Lived in Lisbon until I decided I’d give it a go with doing a PhD in Hull – the plan was to carry on living in Lisbon though. But one sunny lunch time I met my future husband at staff house at Hull Uni, and that was it. One year later we were married. Have stayed in East Yorkshire ever since. I live near Beverley, a beautiful market town, which I love. So I always think of myself as having three identities between France, Portugal and the UK, where I have now lived the longest.

What was your first job?

Ah, difficult to say, depends what you mean. But first first job, babysitter.

What was the toughest job you ever had?

Going to one of my students’ funeral.

What are your hobbies?

Hmm. Not sure I’ve ever considered these as my ‘hobbies’, but things I do to make me happy: take photos (my boys recurrently tease me on the amount of photos I take – if I could speak through photos, I would do), walks (LOVE walking, particularly in the North York moors, the Lake District, or just locally), gardening (love looking after our garden, love pruning!), and do anything that relates to food: eat food, talk food, cook food, watch food, photograph food, discover food, share food etc. Besides that, I’ve always loved jigsaws, and recently I’ve found they help me de-stress. A colleague introduced me to the world of Wentworth wooden jigsaws…. WOW. Ah, and I love dancing, does that count as a hobby? My husband and I started a salsa class about a year ago, one of the best things we’ve done; we’re not that good, but we love it. Highly recommend it, a great way to de-stress and take your mind off the little things that drain your brain day in, day out. And I’ve done Pilates regularly for about 30 years, to keep me sane; and I go running about twice a week supposedly to keep me healthy; I’m rubbish at it.

What is your favourite novel?

Possession, by A.S. Byatt – for lots of reasons, but mainly because this was one of the books I challenged myself to read when I did my English language British Council course for my IELTS exam, all those years ago. And I loved it then already, but then when I moved to the UK I re-read it and realised how appropriate that book had been as a sort of intro into my journey in the UK. Most of the action takes place in this part of the world, between Lincolnshire and the North York Moors, and it’s a story about academics (with archival material in between, a favourite of mine too).

But I love crime fiction, so could not not mention the Maigret series, by Simenon. Absolute genius writing and plots; always happy to re-read them. Could mention any, but let’s go for Maigret et les braves gens.

What is your favourite music?

Ah, I have a very eclectic taste in music. Music is very important to me – always have music on and can’t work without music blasting out in my ear-phones (unless I’m in meetings…). Love classical music, particularly ancient music, but also opera (wrote my whole PhD to the sound of Norma). But also love lots of other styles, and totally love soul music; one of my favourite contemporary bands are the Pink Martini. But my all favourite is undoubtedly Tom Waits. So it’s between Bach’s Cello Suites, Telemann’s Sonate Metodiche, Bellini’s Casta Diva, Charpentier’s Magnificat, Aretha Franklin’s Think, Barbara Lewis’ Baby, I’m Yours, Everything But The Girl’s Come on Home, Edith Piaf’s Milord, Amália’s Com Que Voz, and Tom Waits’ Downtown Train,Martha, Time, Ruby’s Arms, Grapefruit Moon and Jersey Girl. But, when all is said and done, Jersey Girl (sang by T. Waits) will always be my go to song.

What are your favourite pieces of artwork?

Easy, a painting done by my son’s partner of my favourite set of trees, which I’ve photographed about a million times;). They gave it to me as a present, and it’s stunning. See it for yourself:

What is your favourite film?

Another very difficult one, love film, have always done so. The older I get, the more I’d go for a happy ending though, as life is complicated enough. If you asked my sons, they’d say my favourite film is Mary Poppins, so let’s go with that, and add Gentlemen Prefer Blondes, because it’s a Howard Hawks, it stars the magnificent Marilyn Monroe, it’s from the 1950s (my favourite era) and it’s a sort of a musical. Can’t go wrong.

What is your favourite building?

Well, it has to be a parliament, doesn’t it? The question is which one, very tricky. Probably controversial, but I think I’ll go for the Scottish Parliament. Obviously love the Palace of Westminster too, incredibly special and impressive, and of course the Portuguese Assembleia da República is objectively the most beautiful parliament in the world (as my students know, the sky is always a magnificent blue there). But I actually love the modern architecture of Holyrood, and the way it combines natural elements, such as wood, stone, glass, and the way it integrates so many symbolic elements of the land and nation of Scotland; whilst combining also a very modern building with an older one. And I actually love the beauty of the chamber and of the committee rooms (and the view from those rooms…wow). Sorry. I still love Westminster though.

What is your favourite tv show?

Ah, MasterChef (sorry). For a long time I didn’t actually watch any TV. When our sons were growing up, we used to work two shifts (my husband is also an academic): during the day and at night, so that we could be with our sons late afternoon/evening. So we never followed any TV; just watched films every so often. But over the last few years, as we’ve been able to only do one shift, a long day, we do now watch some TV. And we’re obsessed with MasterChef, we watch them all, standard, pros, celebrities, xmas special, whatever it may be.

What is your favourite holiday destination?

Portugal obviously! Anywhere in Portugal, but particularly Lisbon, Ericeira and the Alentejo. It still feels like home, but only with the good bits, and of course the fabulous food; the amazing weather and the stunning sea.

What is your favourite sport?

I’m not really a sports person. My father loved football and played it very well. My older son has inherited this love and gift. My husband is mad cyclist. So I’ll watch football and cycling, to keep them company and I enjoy their appreciation of the sports. My husband is also into climbing (he’s built a climbing wall in the garage during lockdown!), and I used to do it with him (before the kids!); my three sons have inherited his love for climbing, but I can’t say as a mum I enjoy watching them…. Too scary. So, I usually read my book at a nearby café/tea room/rock.

Boothroyd or Bercow?

Boothroyd.

Restoration or Renewal?

Restoration whilst Renewing

Cat or Dog?

Cat.

Fish and chips or Curry?

Fish and chips, if a Friday evening by Hornsea seafront with my boys; curry if made by my husband

Planes, trains or automobiles?

Trains!!! Can’t stand planes or anything about flying, from actual airports, to the flying bit, to the environmental damage they do. It’s mad that we fly everywhere in Europe. If we had a good train infrastructure, there’d be no reason why that shouldn’t be the main means of transport within Europe. And we shouldn’t always thrive to doing things as quickly as possible, getting to places quickly; there’s a lot of value in a slower pace. Train all the way.

Scones: Devonshire or Cornish Method?

No idea, both fine? Pastéis de Nata.

And, finally, a question asked by 8-year-old Seth: Would you rather play football with a snowball, or tennis with a basketball?

Definitely football with a snowball! It’d remind me of my father and I love snow.

Categories
Blog

Why it’s difficult to interview MPs – and how best to do it anyway

Philip Cowley of QMUL discusses the trials and tribulations of the political interview, offering sage advice on how to be successful in this area of research.

Few things in life can be more frustrating than trying to interview MPs. It can consume an enormous amount of time, often appearing to produce little of value in return. Each interview needs arranging, and often rearranging multiple times; there’s travel, always accompanied by a lot of waiting around, as the interviewee’s previous meetings run over; then the actual interview – “terribly sorry, very busy day today, afraid I’ve only got 20 minutes, remind me, what’s this about?” – after which there is more travel and the writing up of any notes. A single half hour interview can easily eat up half a day or more.

You will routinely come out of meetings thinking you’ve wasted your time entirely. They’ll ramble, obfuscate, get confused; they will get things wrong or just can’t remember; they’ll recount war stories, which have, like all well-told anecdotes, become so well polished over the years that they bear little resemblance to the original events; or they’ll pass on unsubstantiated gossip as if it was gospel; they often apply enormous amounts of retrospective judgment and try to place themselves at the centre of every key decision.

In much of this, they are normal human beings exhibiting normal behaviour. But, to misquote that famous line from Casablanca, politicians are like normal people, only more so. They pose especial problems for the interviewer. They are not easy to get to meet and once you’ve met them they are not easy to get stuff out of. This is because:

1. Politicians are busy people. Really busy. Busier than most people can imagine. Even the most junior has an almost infinite set of demands on their time. You are asking them to give up 30 minutes or so – sometimes more – of a packed diary. This is a non-trivial request. They will have plenty of better things they could be doing.

2. While some people might be flattered to be asked to take part in an academic study, politicians generally are not. They get bombarded with requests from school kids, university students, lecturers, pressure groups, and various randoms. If they said yes to everyone, they’d spend their entire day doing nothing else but filling in surveys or giving interviews.

3. You are asking them to do you a favour, in return for which they will likely get nothing. They don’t have to do this; you’re not a constituent. You’re not part of their core business, or even their peripheral business. You almost certainly can’t give them anything useful in return.

4. They can suffer from the bad habits of busy people: impatience, always needing to be elsewhere, with something else to do, constantly checking their phone, looking over your shoulder for someone more important. You are probably the least important thing they are doing that day; don’t assume they will give you much focus.

5. Some politicos are downright suspicious of academia and researchers. This can be an especial problem among parts of the right, who think – not entirely without justification, if we’re being honest – that academia is a hotbed of leftism, unlikely to give them a fair shake of the stick. But it can also be true on the left, especially the more traditional Trade Union-based left, wary of smarty pants academics. The Lib Dems, who often have a whiff of the Senior Common Room about them, used to be very accommodating towards academics but that’s not much help these days.

6. Even those who aren’t actively suspicious often think: what good will come of this? Why wash dirty linen in public? There’s no evidence that Bismarck ever uttered that much used quote about law and sausages – that no one should ever see either being made – but it is a view to which many politicians hold. Why risk it?

7. Politicians are used to evading difficult questions. It’s one of their core skills. If they don’t want to answer your question, they won’t. You’re in no position to probe aggressively – they can simply end the meeting if they don’t like the way things are going – and even if you could, it wouldn’t work. It is a never-ending source of amazement how many academics think they can rock up to an interview with a politician they’ve never met before and expect full disclosure. They may well not lie to you (although some will, without missing a beat) but they almost certainly won’t answer everything frankly. To expect anything else is naïve.

8. They are used to debating and challenging. Indeed, they love it. You can turn up with a list of ten carefully constructed questions, central to your research, only to find the MP doesn’t answer a single one of them in the way you expected. Worst case: they challenge the underlying assumptions of question one and go off on a long explanation of how you are essentially an idiot who doesn’t understand the subject. You never get to question two.

Based on my experience of doing around 1000 such interviews, over the last 30 or so years, this paper (available free of charge at SSRN) explains how best to overcome these problems, how best to get access to politicians, and then how to get the best out of the interviews you might do. The paper consists mostly of things I wish I’d been told at the beginning of my career – although whether I’d have listened is another matter entirely. 

Philip Cowley is Professor of Politics at Queen Mary University London. To learn more about his research click here

Categories
Blog

PMQs: quieter and more civilised but not more accountable

Stephane Revillet considers whether the semi-virtual format for Prime Minister’s Question Time has improved or diminished the possibility for executive accountability.

In the face of the Covid-19 crisis, the Hansard Society asks in April of 2020 “how parliamentarians can conduct their core constitutional duties of holding the government to account, when [they] are all required to adopt rigorous social distancing”. This question is even more relevant in relation to PMQs insofar as it is the most attended and the most watched parliamentary event of the week.

Due to social distancing, far fewer MPs have been able to attend PMQs, and that has resulted in less noise being made and fewer raucous attacks levelled on the floor of the House. John Craig of Sky News recommends that “[they] need the Commons to return to its usual boisterous, raucous and spontaneous normality if government ministers are to be held truly accountable”. These remarks beg the question of whether disorder is an effective instrument in holding the government to account.  And what “truly accountable” means in the specific context of PMQs.

The interruption as a tool to hold the government to account

This blog will focus on two types of disorderly behaviour: interruptions and unparliamentary language which is here defined as ‘Face threatening acts’ (FTA), for example insults, soundbites or offensive remarks. Besides the adversarial and confrontational style of parliamentary politics, what may account for the extensive use of FTAs lies at the core of the function of PMQs: holding the government to account.

According to Graham P. Thomas’s definition of accountability, “criticising the government’s failure, incompetence or deceit” are FTAs per se, which inevitably causes disturbance especially when the PM counter-attacks to save face. More often than not, such departures from the rules are tolerated by the Speaker, very few FTAs are sanctioned. Sandra Harris mentions a very high level of tolerance of ‘illegal interventions.’ This tolerance towards disorderly language lies at the root of accountability. So, it is no wonder that MPs who want to make their point stronger should strike harder, which inevitably leads to an increase in the number and in the intensity of the attacks. In other words, the level of expected accountability might be reflected in the intensity and frequency of the attacks.

Whether they are challenging or dismissive backchanneling interruptions (if we use Cornilia Ilie’s typology), they serve the purpose of interrupting the scripted speech of the PM urging him/her to answer more spontaneously. Those impromptu answers are valuable in appraising the government’s accountability. The PM will be judged more on the answers they provide off the cuff than on ready-made answers.

The consequence (or the purpose) of such interruptions is to warn people about a message that is being delivered. Whether the interruption points out an inaccuracy or even a downright lie, it doesn’t matter. The government’s accountability doesn’t relate so much to the message or to the speech of the PM but to those signals sent out to the pubic prompting them to call into question specific points or even to a greater extent call into question the person’s credibility.

What does “true accountability” mean in the context of PMQs?

MPs represent their constituents in Parliament, and defend their interests. Unlike other parliamentary sessions, PMQs is a vehicle for individual backbenchers to raise the grievances of constituents. MPs are the voice of their constituents in Parliament. In this theatrical performance backbenchers do not remain a passive audience. They make themselves and the people’s voice heard by causing disturbance, by interrupting the speaking debaters. Backbenchers who are gathered in the House acting on behalf of the citizens take part in the debate through the noise they make in reaction to the speech of the leaders. This way of interacting with the executive in order to hold them accountable is popular in essence. It is the most watched parliamentary event of the week and that also means that PMQs involves a way of discursive interaction and styles of communication pertaining to and deriving from the people.

In ancient Athens, the thorubos (meaning the noise of the participants) was the expression of the sovereignty of the people (dèmos). Making noise and interrupting the debaters represented an active participation in the debate. The disruptions and roar of the backbenchers is the popular expression of the distrust, the discontent or the indignation of the people and in that case those feelings are not mediated by long-winded technical pre-scripted speeches.  Even though the House debates have been subject to a new configuration where the paradigms in terms of disorderly behaviour have critically changed, MPs are still prone to disorderly attacks and interruptions. It took MPs only seven sessions with social distancing before going back to their old ways.

It seems that causing some kind of disorder through FTAs and interruptions is a natural and inescapable process of holding the government to account, and that is what ‘true accountability’ implies, that is to say making the voice and the noise of the people heard by using the mode of communication of the ordinary citizens. This suggests that the distance between the government and the people should be reduced to increase government’s accountability.

How is the distance reduced?

In the orderly question-answer sequences those disruptions act as meta-discursive (or rather metadramatic I should say) short-cuts or substitutes for longer, more elaborate answers or counter-arguments. This simplification of the message makes it easier for people to grasp the meaning of the spontaneous intervention of a member. For Cornelia Ilie the emotional force of insults that is correlated to the (over)-simplification of the message is tremendous and outweighs their rational force. I would go as far as contending that insults produce the same effects as symbols. They condense a wide range of meanings and emotions.

For Murray Edelman, people think in terms of stereotypes and oversimplifications due to some incapacity to “tolerate ambiguous and complex situations and respond chiefly to symbols that oversimplify and distort”. My point here is that the use of interruptions and disruptions is a way to circumvent rationality thereby getting closer to the people, connecting with them in a more intimate way. The closer to the people, the better the accountability.

This blog is a summary of a presentation at our group conference.

To view the presentation see our Youtube Channel