Representation

Representation

The role that Parliament undoubtedly has, of representing the people, is a difficult one to grasp. The problem for MPs is that the are required to represent so many different sections of society and so many ideas. The average MP has 70,000 constituents whom he is expected to represent. This is no small task. We can identify the following responsibilities.

They are elected to represent their party and its manifesto. Therefore we normally expect an MP to 'toe the party line'. However, when there is a matter of conscience. or overwhelming public concern, MPs may feel they will represent their national interest more effectively by defying own party their leadership. In recent years this has taken place among groups of MPs on such issues as the British membership of the European Union (Conservatives) and reform of the NH (Liberal Democrats)

MPs must represent the interests of their own constituency whenever they are involved in government policy or with A ministerial decision. When, for example, it was proposed to set up a number of centers for asylum seekers in rural areas in 2004-05, the MPs involved set up an ultimately successful campaign to reverse the policy It is typical for local MPs to become active in decisions To build, for example, road by-passes (or not to build them), nuclear power stations, airport terminals and the likel During debates in 2006- 07 on the possible introduction of a number of casinos in Britain, some MPs were concerned with Attracting casinos to their constituencies to provide employment, while others were anxious to prevent such developments in their regions on the grounds that it might attract crime or cause excessive gambling. When there emerged a proposal to build a third runway at Heathrow airport in 2009-10, the relevant MPs from constituencies in the Thames Valley actually opposed the plans or sought to change the details of those plans.

There are times when the national interest can be at stake and MPs or peers will take this into account when parliamentary debates are held. Here our representatives in both House must weigh up their party's attitude to the issue against what they perceive to be in the nation's best interests. The 2003 war in Iraq, Britain's relations with the European Union, how we should deal with suspected terrorists (in particular whether we could suspend civil liberties in the fight against terrorism) and whether identity cards should become compulsory are all examples of where our representative may Step out of traditional party allegiance and consider the country as a whole on non-partisan lines.

It is currently estimated to be about 75 per cent. MPs are either paid to retain or represent an outside group or regularly support the interests of a group without payment. Many peers fulfil to similar role in the House of Lords. This is considered normal and part of the democratic process. The safeguard, any representative who is paid to represent groups must declare their interest and avoid any possibility of corrupt practices. It is well known, therefore, that many trade unions, professional associations, industrial organizations, large companies and campaign groups have friendly representatives in both Houses. They will alert the groups to any hostile policies, promote their interests and attempt to gain publicity for their purposes.

The main occasions when this process occurs during debates, committee hearings, questions to ministers and three special types of parliamentary opportunities for MPs to raise such issues. These are adjournment debates, early day motions and ten minute rule bills. They are gaps in standard procedure that have been protected to give MP the chance to raise a matter of constituent interest or one that concerns any external group which they represent. In all these cases, no response from government is expected, but at least the issue is a matter of public recall and may be used for later campaigns.

In the House of Lords, external groups are particularly active when legislative amendments are being considered. Most peers are not strongly tied down by party discipline and many see their role in terms of protecting minority interests. The Lords amendment process when government is at its most vulnerable in Parliament is where it representation on interests can be seen at its its most intense.

Redress of grievances

Along with consent to finance, the redress of citizens' grievances is an ancient parliamentary function. It is necessarily carried out by individual MPs on behalf of their constituents. Where a constituent feels they have been Unfairly or unjustly treated by the government or by one of its agencies such as the NHS the police, immigration authorities, the socia security system or the taxation authorities, that constituent may well complain to their local MP. This privilege remains part of an unwritten contract between MPs and the government it is that Parliament will normally support government in its key functions, in return for which MPs will be given special access to ministers.

The degree to which MPs undertake such work varies a good deal. Some are known as constituent workers, others are less constituent enthusiastic. Ministers find the most difficult role (remember that MPs, including ministers are also their role is usually the prime minister), but MPs performed by friendly MPs will by their own paid constituency agent. MP's raise issues on the floor of the will see ministers and civil servants directly.

Private members' legislation

Most legislation is presented by the government. Opposition parties are not allowed to do this. However, a few lucky MPs and peers, who win an annual ballot, are allowed to presen their own private legislation. Though such proposals are often blocked by the government, occasionally a so-called 'private members' bill' does find its way through to law. This requires an enormous effort by the MP or peer concerned, who must both persuade the large number of his colleagues to support it and persuade the government to keep their hands off it. Sometimes, of course, the government actually supports private members' bill, in which case it is almost certain to pass.

In effect, therefore, private members' legislation government either can succeed only if it does not support it or has its own reasons for one opposing it. Thus, successes are rare. Yet in the most significant pieces of legislation modern history was a private members' bill.

This was David Steel's Abortion Act of 1967, which legalized abortion for the first time. In the same were private acts between homosexuals were also legalized under such legislation. More recently, private members' legislation has tended to be less momentous and often affects small numbers of people. It has concerns such issues as dog breeding, energy conservation in private homes, guide dogs in taxis and employee share- owning schemes. However, in 2007, a significant Act was passed following the initiative of Lord Lester in the House of Lords. This was the Forced Marriage Act, protecting individuals against being forced to marry against their will similarly, in 2012, the Live Music Act, another private members' bill initiated in the Lords, succeeded, making it easier for small venues to obtain licenses to play Live music.