Is Westminster politics really a waste of time?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/13/mhairi-black-westminster-waste-of-time Version 0 of 1. ‘As a backbench MP of an opposition party, her chances of making a difference are minimal’John Crace What’s one of the rarest sights in the House of Commons? A government minister giving a direct answer to a direct question. And even when a direct answer is given, it’s frequently only a best guess. In the referendum campaign last year, David Cameron was asked at prime minister’s questions whether he would stay on if Britain voted to leave the EU. Much to everyone’s surprise – including his own, possibly – Cameron replied with a one word “Yes”. We all know how that one ended. Mhairi Black, the Scots nationalist who defeated Labour’s Douglas Alexander in the 2015 election to become Westminster’s youngest MP, has given an interview to the Sunday Post in which she says she is contemplating standing down after just one term. “It’s so old and defunct in terms of its systems and procedures,” she said. “A lot of the time it is just a waste of time.” This could be all academic if Nicola Sturgeon forces a second referendum and the Scots vote to leave the Union as there will be no Scottish MPs in Westminster. But either way, she has a point. As a backbench MP of an opposition party, her chances of making a difference are minimal. The best she can hope for in her first five years is to get herself noticed with a few timely interventions – a probing question that doesn’t get answered or a stellar performance at a Westminster Hall debate that carries little parliamentary clout – in the hope of getting preferment at some point in the future. Backbenchers have to be prepared to play a long waiting game to make their mark. The most ambitious and the most vocal – often one and the same – tend to rise up the ladder by making themselves useful. These MPs have little shame and will be willing to ask the most stupid and obsequious of questions handed to them by the government whips, in the hope of being earmarked for office later in the careers. “Would the prime minister agree with me that the byelection victory in Copeland shows that her plans to deliver a fairer society for everyone is working?” Cringe-makingly embarrassing for any normal person; but a matter of pride for any MP on the make. Not that such fawning is an automatic guarantee of success. Not every ambitious backbencher will get to be a junior minister. Those who fail then tend to join the awkward squad of the overlooked: MPs who like to see themselves as Westminster characters. The backbench tribes don’t always divide that straightforwardly. There are also ex-ministers whose careers have nose-dived, MPs who have no interest in promotion and assign themselves to the awkward squad from day one, and others who remain totally anonymous; after three years of sketching from parliament, I am aware of at least 100 MPs who have never contributed anything of note. And as of the past six months, there are Labour MPs whose only goal is to say next to nothing in a passive-aggressive show of no confidence in their leader. For them, their powerlessness has almost become a badge of honour. But there is a general truth that parliamentary procedures are weighted in favour of government. The logic being that if it was that easy for the government to be defeated in the Commons then nothing would ever happen. Some might think that not such a bad idea, but that’s another question. For someone like Black, who clearly wants to make a difference but doesn’t want to compromise herself by being obviously sycophantic, the choices are limited. Hardly surprising then, that she finds herself frustrated and disillusioned. Even the great set pieces of Westminster – PMQs and urgent questions to ministers – that are meant to be showcases of democracy where the government is held to account often become a procedural farce as ministers are not actually obliged to answer any questions directly. There is nothing more frustrating for a backbench MP – and indeed the voting public – than having genuine questions not answered. Before every PMQs and UQs, the prime minister and ministers practise not answering difficult questions. Direct questions are met with statistics and counter-facts that don’t have anything to do with the matter in hand. Labour questions to the Tories about the NHS are invariably met with two responses. Either, “What about the NHS in Wales?” (which is Labour run) or “We will take no lesson from a party that presided over Mid-Staffs” (that scandal was back in 2008). Neither answer addresses the subject in hand and is an abuse of democratic accountability and there is nothing a backbench MP can do about it. MPs are allowed no follow-up questions and even though the leader of the opposition gets six questions at PMQs, there’s nothing to stop the prime minister giving six identical non-answers. Yet Black shouldn’t give up too soon. She may be disillusioned, but her departure would be a huge loss for parliament. I can think of any number of MPs that parliament would be better off without than her, as her interventions in the Commons are usually sharp and to the point. So I would encourage her to devote more of her time to the work and pensions select committee on which she has served for nearly two years. Select committees are cross-party groups of MPs that get to ask politicians and officials the really important questions. And unlike in the Commons, MPs can ask the same question over and over again until they get a satisfactory answer. During the referendum campaign, it was the Treasury select committee that time and again dismantled the competing claims of the Vote Leave and Remain campaigns. It’s just a pity no one was really watching. ‘Select committees are the only reason we have seen Murdoch, Green and the bankers publicly called to account’Chris Mullin Mhairi Black is a remarkable young woman: bright, articulate, mature beyond her years, but I guess it was always predictable that she would find life in parliament frustrating. Not least because, like any good Scots nationalist, she never wanted to be there in the first place. On top of which she has been elected in what appears to be an era of indefinite one-party rule and the party in question is one with which she is fundamentally out of sympathy. I know the feeling. I was first elected in 1987, at the height of the Thatcher Decade. What’s more it had been made clear to me by the leaders of my own party that I could not expect the merest preferment. Fortunately, I had other things to do. My novel A Very British Coup was in the process of being made into a television series and I was heavily involved in the campaign to rescue the innocent people convicted of various terrorist atrocities, so I set up my own department, a little ministry of justice. Most backbenchers are not so fortunate and it can be a struggle to remain relevant. As one of my more cynical colleagues once remarked, “We come here wanting to change the world and we end up admiring the architecture.” Some MPs resolve this dilemma by turning themselves into fairy godmothers on behalf of their constituents, spending most of their time searching out people with problems and doing their best to solve them. Constituency casework is all very well and I do not denigrate it (on the contrary), but it should only be a relatively small part of an MP’s job. Like it or not, the real job is in Westminster – holding the executive to account; something that the House of Commons does imperfectly at the best of times. A functioning opposition is an essential part of the democratic process. It can take many forms – from either the front bench or through membership of a select committee. Select committees, after all, are the only reason we have seen Rupert Murdoch, Philip Green or the bankers publicly called to account. These were good moments for parliament. With one of Black’s complaints I have less sympathy. “It’s a pain to come up and down every week,” she says. Well, Mhairi, that was always part of the job description. Parliament is in London because that is where the government is. Should it move to Edinburgh, you won’t have to travel so far. Whether or not she stands again I am confident that we will hear more of Mhairi Black. Who knows, perhaps as prime minister of an independent Scotland? But then I suspect she will find that has its frustrations, too. • Chris Mullin was the Labour MP for Sunderland South from 1987-2010. He has recently published his autobiography, Hinterland. |