Beyond Numbers: the Substantive Representation of Individuals of Immigrant- Origin by Immigrant-Origin Mps

Beyond Numbers: The Substantive Representation of Individuals of Immigrant- Origin by Immigrant-Origin MPs

A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in the Faculty of Humanities

2019

R. Anthony Chambers School of Social Sciences

Contents

List of Tables ...... 6 List of Appendix Tables ...... 8 List of Figures ...... 10 List of Abbreviations ...... 11 Declaration ...... 13 Statement of Copyright...... 13 Acknowledgements ...... 14 Abstract ...... 15 Chapter 1. Introduction...... 16 Main Research Question & Project Overview ...... 17 Why the study of substantive representation of immigrant-origin individuals is both important and topical ...... 19 The Immigrant-Origin Population of the UK ...... 22 How large is the immigrant-origin population? ...... 23 Descriptive & Substantive Representation ...... 30 The Wider Literature on Descriptive and Substantive Representation ...... 30 Originality and Contribution ...... 32 Methodology ...... 34 Different approaches to measuring substantive representation in extant literature ...... 34 Using parliamentary questions for written answer to quantify substantive representation ...... 35 Immigrant-Origin Interests or Ethnic Minority Interests? ...... 36 Structure of the Dissertation ...... 36 Chapter 2. The Representation of Politically Underrepresented Groups in Theoretical Literature ...... 39 Defining Political Representation ...... 40 Parliamentary Representation and Wider British Society ...... 43 Why descriptive representatives might be more likely to provide substantive representation ...... 44 Shared Experiences ...... 44 Group Consciousness and Linked Fate ...... 45 Surrogate Representation ...... 47 Why descriptive representatives might not necessarily be more likely to provide substantive representation ...... 49 ‘Like’ will not always be best suited to represent ‘like’ ...... 49 Non-descriptive representatives might be just as willing to represent (and capable of representing) underrepresented groups ...... 51

Levels of group consciousness can vary among individuals ...... 53 When it comes to substantive representation, other factors may be more salient than shared personal traits and characteristics ...... 56 Chapter Summary ...... 59 Chapter 3. An Overview and Discussion of the Methods Used in This Study ...... 61 Parliamentary Questions for Written Answer ...... 62 Why use parliamentary questions for written answer when studying substantive representation? ..65 Where were parliamentary questions for written answer directed? ...... 67 The Questions Used ...... 69 The Search Term Method ...... 70 Coding the Questions ...... 71 How Questions Were Coded: Coding Criteria ...... 72 Types of questions that were considered to demonstrate substantive representation ...... 72 Types of questions that were not considered to demonstrate substantive representation ...... 80 Exploring the Types of Words and Language Used by MPs in Parliamentary Questions ...... 83 Modelling Strategy ...... 87 Main Independent Variables ...... 87 Main Control Variables ...... 89 Main Hypotheses ...... 90 Summary ...... 91 Chapter 4. Determining the Interests of the UK’s Immigrant-Origin Population ...... 93 Do Immigrant-Origin Individuals have an ‘Agenda’? ...... 94 Assigning of Interests ...... 97 How Interests are Determined in this Thesis...... 98 The Data Used in this Chapter ...... 99 Adjustments to the Datasets ...... 101 Differences and Similarities in Interests within Different Areas of Policy ...... 103 Health ...... 104 Discrimination ...... 105 Crime and the Criminal Justice System ...... 108 The Labour Market ...... 116 Chapter Summary ...... 120 Chapter 5. Evidence of Substantive Representation in Different Policy Areas: Health ...... 122 Hypotheses ...... 123 Selection of Health Issues to Examine Substantive Representation ...... 126 Cardiovascular Disease ...... 126 Mental Health ...... 127

How did MPs discuss CVD and mental health in their parliamentary questions? ...... 128 Were immigrant-origin MPs more likely to table questions in the interests of I.O. individuals? ...... 131 Dependent Variables ...... 131 Independent & Control Variables ...... 134 Results...... 135 Discussion ...... 141 Conclusion ...... 144 Chapter 6. Evidence of Substantive Representation in Different Policy Areas: Prejudice and Discrimination ...... 146 Hypotheses ...... 147 Prejudice ...... 151 How did MPs discuss discrimination in their parliamentary questions? ...... 152 Were immigrant-origin MPs more likely to table questions in the interests of I.O. individuals? ...... 154 Dependent Variables ...... 155 Independent & Control Variables ...... 157 Results...... 159 Discussion ...... 165 Conclusion ...... 166 Chapter 7. Evidence of Substantive Representation in Different Policy Areas: Crime and the Criminal Justice System ...... 168 Hypotheses ...... 169 I.O. Individuals’ Anxieties about and Reported Experiences of Crime ...... 171 Fairness in the Criminal Justice System ...... 174 The Greater Focus on Ethnic Minorities in Extant Research ...... 176 How did MPs discuss crime and the CJS in their parliamentary questions? ...... 178 Were immigrant-origin MPs more likely to table questions in the interests of I.O. individuals? ...... 181 Dependent Variables ...... 181 Independent & Control Variables ...... 184 Results...... 186 Discussion ...... 191 Conclusion ...... 193 Chapter 8. Evidence of Substantive Representation in Different Policy Areas: The Labour Market ..... 195 Hypotheses ...... 196 Accessing the Labour Market ...... 197 ‘In Work’ Disadvantages ...... 201 How did MPs discuss (un)employment in their parliamentary questions? ...... 202 Were immigrant-origin MPs more likely to table questions in the interests of I.O. individuals? ...... 206

Dependent Variables ...... 206 Independent & Control Variables ...... 210 Results...... 212 Discussion ...... 217 Conclusion ...... 218 Chapter 9. Conclusion ...... 221 Introduction ...... 221 Main Findings...... 225 Contribution to the Wider Body of Research on Substantive Representation...... 228 Evaluating the Project ...... 232 Opportunities for Future Research ...... 237 Bibliography ...... 240 Literature ...... 240 Media Sources ...... 253 Appendices ...... 254 Appendix I: Immigrant-Origin MPs Serving During the 2010-15 Parliament ...... 254 Appendix II. Search Term Dictionaries ...... 259 Appendix III. Supplementary Collocation Data ...... 263

Word Count: 77,656

List of Tables

Table 1. 1. Population of the United Kingdom by ethnicity, 2011 Census ...... 25 Table 1. 2. Family background of MPs serving during the 2010-15 Parliament by political party ...... 28 Table 1. 3. Immigrant-Origin MPs serving during the 2010-15 Parliament by ethnicity ...... 29

Table 3. 1. Concordance for cardiovascular disease in questions tabled by I.O. MPs ...... 85 Table 3. 2. Independent & Control Variables (Descriptive Statistics) ...... 90

Table 4. 1. Re-coded regions by country of birth (I.O. whites only) ...... 102 Table 4. 2. Experienced discrimination in the last five years ...... 106 Table 4. 3. Frequency of discrimination experienced ...... 106 Table 4. 4. Experienced discrimination on the grounds of ethnicity, race or skin colour...... 107

Table 5. 1. Collocates for cardiovascular disease in questions tabled by Native & I.O. MPs...... 129 Table 5. 2. Collocates for cardiovascular disease in questions tabled by white British, I.O. white & BAME MPs ...... 129 Table 5. 3. Collocates for mental health in questions tabled by Native & I.O. MPs ...... 130 Table 5. 4. Collocates for mental health in questions tabled by White British, I.O. White & BAME MPs . 130 Table 5. 5. I.O. Health, CVD & Mental Health-related questions – total numbers and column percentages ...... 133 Table 5. 6. Independent & Control Variables (Descriptive Statistics) ...... 135 Table 5. 7. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to I.O. Health...... 137 Table 5. 8. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to CVD ...... 139 Table 5. 9. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to Mental Health...... 141

Table 6. 1. Collocates for discrim* in questions tabled by Native & I.O. MPs ...... 153 Table 6. 2. Collocates for discrim* in questions tabled by White British, I.O. White & BAME MPs ...... 154 Table 6. 3. I.O. Prejudice & Other Prejudice-related questions – total numbers and column percentages ...... 157 Table 6. 4. Independent & Control Variables (Descriptive Statistics) ...... 159 Table 6. 5. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to I.O. Prejudice ...... 161 Table 6. 6. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to Other Prejudice ...... 164

Table 7. 1. Collocates for crime in questions tabled by Native & I.O. MPs ...... 179 Table 7. 2. Collocates for crime in questions tabled by White British, I.O. White & BAME MPs ...... 180 Table 7. 3. Collocates for justice system in questions tabled by Native & I.O. MPs ...... 180 Table 7. 4. Collocates for justice system in questions tabled by White British, I.O. White & BAME MPs ...... 181 Table 7. 5. I.O. Crime & CJS related-questions – total numbers and column percentages ...... 184 Table 7. 6. Independent & Control Variables (Descriptive Statistics) ...... 186 Table 7. 7. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to I.O. Crime ...... 188 Table 7. 8. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to CJS ...... 190

Table 8. 1. Collocates for unemploy* in questions tabled by Native & I.O. MPs ...... 203 Table 8. 2. Collocates for unemploy* in questions tabled by White British, I.O. White & BAME MPs ...... 204 Table 8. 3. Collocates for employ* in questions tabled by Native & I.O. MPs ...... 205 Table 8. 4. Collocates for employ* in questions tabled by White British, I.O. White & BAME MPs .. 205 Table 8. 5. Unemployment & Employment-related questions – total numbers and column percentages ...... 209 Table 8. 6. Independent & Control Variables (Descriptive Statistics) ...... 212 Table 8. 7. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to Unemployment . 214 Table 8. 8. Negative binomial regression for the Number of questions relating to Employment ..... 216

List of Appendix Tables

Table A1. 1. White Immigrant-Origin MPs ...... 254 Table A1. 2. Black, Asian & Minority Ethnic (BAME) Immigrant-Origin MPs ...... 257

Table A2. 1. Search terms used to help identify questions relating to CVD ...... 259 Table A2. 2. Search terms used to help identify questions relating to Mental Health ...... 259 Table A2. 3. Search terms used to help identify questions relating to I.O. Prejudice ...... 260 Table A2. 4. Search terms used to help identify questions relating to Other Prejudice ...... 260 Table A2. 5. Search terms used to help identify questions relating to I.O. Crime ...... 261 Table A2. 6. Search terms used to help identify questions relating to CJS ...... 261 Table A2. 7. Search terms used to help identify questions relating to Unemployment ...... 262 Table A2. 8. Search terms used to help identify questions relating to Employment ...... 262

Table A3. 1. Supplementary data on collocates for cardiovascular disease (Native MPs) ...... 263 Table A3. 2. Supplementary data on collocates for cardiovascular disease (I.O. MPs)...... 263 Table A3. 3. Supplementary data on collocates for cardiovascular disease (White British MPs) ...... 263 Table A3. 4. Supplementary data on collocates for cardiovascular disease (I.O. White MPs) ...... 264 Table A3. 5. Supplementary data on collocates for cardiovascular disease (BAME MPs)...... 264 Table A3. 6. Supplementary data on collocates for mental health (Native MPs) ...... 264 Table A3. 7. Supplementary data on collocates for mental health (I.O. MPs) ...... 265 Table A3. 8. Supplementary data on collocates for mental health (White British MPs) ...... 265 Table A3. 9. Supplementary data on collocates for mental health (I.O. White MPs) ...... 265 Table A3. 10. Supplementary data on collocates for mental health (BAME MPs) ...... 266 Table A3. 11. Supplementary data on collocates for discrim* (Native MPs) ...... 266 Table A3. 12. Supplementary data on collocates for discrim* (I.O. MPs) ...... 266 Table A3. 13. Supplementary data on collocates for discrim* (White British MPs) ...... 267 Table A3. 14. Supplementary data on collocates for discrim* (I.O. White MPs) ...... 267 Table A3. 15. Supplementary data on collocates for discrim* (BAME MPs) ...... 267 Table A3. 16. Supplementary data on collocates for crime (Native MPs) ...... 268 Table A3. 17. Supplementary data on collocates for crime (I.O. MPs)...... 268 Table A3. 18. Supplementary data on collocates for crime (White British MPs) ...... 268 Table A3. 19. Supplementary data on collocates for crime (I.O. White MPs) ...... 269

Table A3. 20. Supplementary data on collocates for crime (BAME MPs)...... 269 Table A3. 21. Supplementary data on collocates for justice system (Native MPs) ...... 269 Table A3. 22. Supplementary data on collocates for justice system (I.O. MPs) ...... 270 Table A3. 23. Supplementary data on collocates for justice system (White British MPs) ...... 270 Table A3. 24. Supplementary data on collocates for justice system (I.O. White MPs) ...... 270 Table A3. 25. Supplementary data on collocates for justice system (BAME MPs) ...... 271 Table A3. 26. Supplementary data on collocates for unemploy* (Native MPs) ...... 271 Table A3. 27. Supplementary data on collocates for unemploy* (I.O. MPs) ...... 271 Table A3. 28. Supplementary data on collocates for unemploy* (White British MPs) ...... 272 Table A3. 29. Supplementary data on collocates for unemploy* (I.O. White MPs)...... 272 Table A3. 30. Supplementary data on collocates for unemploy* (BAME MPs) ...... 272 Table A3. 31. Supplementary data on collocates for employ* (Native MPs) ...... 273 Table A3. 32. Supplementary data on collocates for employ* (I.O. MPs) ...... 273 Table A3. 33. Supplementary data on collocates for employ* (White British MPs) ...... 273 Table A3. 34. Supplementary data on collocates for employ* (I.O. White MPs)...... 274 Table A3. 35. Supplementary data on collocates for employ* (BAME MPs) ...... 274

List of Figures

Figure 1. 1. Ethnic Groups, 2001 – 2011, England and Wales ...... 20 Figure 1. 2. Ethnic Groups, 2001 – 2011, Scotland ...... 20 Figure 1. 3. Population of United Kingdom by ethnicity, 2011 Census ...... 26 Figure 1. 4. Estimated sizes of the native & immigrant-origin populations of the UK ...... 26

Figure 3. 1. Number of parliamentary questions for written answer tabled by party ...... 65 Figure 3. 2. Number of parliamentary questions for written answer received government department ...... 68 Figure 3. 3. Distribution of parliamentary questions for written answer received by government department, Native & I.O. MPs ...... 69

Figure 4. 1. Discriminated against on the grounds of ethnicity, race or skin colour ...... 107 Figure 4. 2. Worry about becoming a victim of crime in general ...... 109 Figure 4. 3. Worry about becoming a victim of crime in general (I.O. Whites by country of birth) .. 110 Figure 4. 4. Worry about being physically attacked because of your skin colour, ethnic origin or religion ...... 111 Figure 4. 5. Worry about being physically attacked because of your skin colour, ethnic origin or religion (I.O. Whites by country of birth) ...... 112 Figure 4. 6. ‘How much of a problem is racial or religious harassment (in your local area) even if it doesn't affect you personally?’ ...... 113 Figure 4. 7. ‘How much of a problem is racial or religious harassment (in your local area) even if it doesn't affect you personally?’ (I.O. Whites by country of birth)...... 114 Figure 4. 8. Personal experience of harassment on the grounds of skin colour, ethnic origin or religion (in your local area) during the last two years ...... 115 Figure 4. 9. Personal experience of harassment on the grounds of skin colour, ethnic origin or religion (in your local area) during the last two years (I.O. Whites by country of birth) ...... 115 Figure 4. 10. Reason for taking part-time work ...... 117 Figure 4. 11. Reason for taking part-time work (I.O. Whites by country of birth) ...... 118 Figure 4. 12. ‘Is your job permanent or not permanent in some way’? ...... 119 Figure 4. 13. ‘Is your job permanent or not permanent in some way’? (I.O. Whites by country of birth) ...... 119

List of Abbreviations

A8 – Accession Eight

AIPP – Anti-Immigrant Party Presence

APPG – all-party parliamentary group

BAME – Black and Minority Ethnic

BCS – British Crime Survey

BES – British Election Study

BNP – British National Party

CJS – criminal justice system

CMD – common mental disorders

CoDE – Centre on the Dynamics of Ethnicity

Con – Conservative Party

CSEW – Crime Survey for England and Wales

CVD – cardiovascular disease

DSS – Department for Social Security

DUP – Democratic Unionist Party

EMBES – Ethnic Minority British Election Survey

EMPIRIC – Ethnic Minority Psychiatric Illness Rates in the Community

EU – European Union

HOCS – Home Office Citizenship Survey

I.O. – Immigrant-origin

Lab – Labour Party

LFS – Labour Force Survey

LGBT – lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender

Lib Dem – Liberal Democrats

MP – Member of Parliament

NF – National Front

OBV – Operation Black Vote

ONS – Office for National Statistics

PTSD – post-traumatic stress disorder

SDLP – Social Democratic and Labour Party

SNP – Scottish National Party

UK – United Kingdom

UKIP – United Kingdom Independence Party

UN – United Nations

UUP – Ulster Unionist Party

Declaration

No portion of the work referred to in the thesis has been submitted in support of an application for another degree or qualification of this or any other university or other institute of learning.

Statement of Copyright

i. The author of this thesis (including any appendices and/or schedules to this thesis) owns certain copyright or related rights in it (the “Copyright”) and s/he has given The University of Manchester certain rights to use such Copyright, including for administrative purposes. ii. Copies of this thesis, either in full or in extracts and whether in hard or electronic copy, may be made only in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended) and regulations issued under it or, where appropriate, in accordance with licensing agreements which the University has from time to time. This page must form part of any such copies made. iii. The ownership of certain Copyright, patents, designs, trademarks and other intellectual property (the “Intellectual Property”) and any reproductions of copyright works in the thesis, for example graphs and tables (“Reproductions”), which may be described in this thesis, may not be owned by the author and may be owned by third parties. Such Intellectual Property and Reproductions cannot and must not be made available for use without the prior written permission of the owner(s) of the relevant Intellectual Property and/or Reproductions. iv. Further information on the conditions under which disclosure, publication and commercialisation of this thesis, the Copyright and any Intellectual Property and/or Reproductions described in it may take place is available in the University IP Policy (see http://documents.manchester.ac.uk/DocuInfo.aspx?DocID=2442 0), in any relevant Thesis restriction declarations deposited in the University Library, The University Library’s regulations (see http://www.library.manchester.ac.uk/about/regulations/) and in The University’s policy on Presentation of Theses.

Acknowledgements

While it is not something of which I have firsthand experience and or knowledge, I have, on occasion, mused that undertaking a PhD is like raising a child as it requires close attention, nurturing and care over the course of a number of years. Now that my ‘child’ has reached maturity, it feels like quite a surreal moment.

I am grateful for a number of individuals and institutions for the role they have played during this significant stage of my life. Firstly, I am grateful to the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) for supporting me financially during most of this time and to the North West Doctoral Training Centre (NWDTC) for awarding me with a grant to embark on an overseas research visit to the University of Bamberg in my second year and for assisting me in attending several academic conferences both home and abroad.

In addition, I am grateful to my supervisors, Professors Maria Sobolewska and Francesca Gains for their comments and feedback on various chapter drafts and for their overall guidance and support along the way. I am personally indebted to the individual(s) connected to the Pathways project for archiving all parliamentary questions submitted by British MPs during the 2010-15 Parliament. Their hard work certainly made my life easier as I did not have to gather all these myself!

Among the Politics PhD community at Manchester, a special thank you to Matt Crow (future Labour MP) for the lunchtime conversations and humour and to my ‘brother’ Konstantinos (‘KK’) Kanellopoulos (future resident of the Maximos Mansion). In addition, I would like to thank a range of other colleagues from the Department for their company and for taking the time to help me with research and teaching-related queries over the last three and a half years.

I reserve special gratitude to members of my family including my sister Maddie and my maternal grandmother Eileen. And most important of all, my parents Robert and Jane who, throughout my life have been, to use our family cricket analogy, the ‘team’ in the Pavilion while I am at, or am heading out to the crease to bat. I know I struck lucky in the parental lottery. This thesis is dedicated to them.

Robert Anthony Chambers

Manchester, July 2019

Abstract

In both scholarly and non-academic discourse, it has long been and continues to be considered important that a national legislature should reflect or resemble the society which it has been elected to represent, for both symbolic and substantive reasons. Indeed, this is considered to be particularly important for groups which have been politically underrepresented in a descriptive sense as it ensures that their interests in relation to policy are adequately represented. Thus far, there has been a degree of academic attention paid to examining the link between descriptive and substantive representation in relation to individuals from a black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) background. However, there has hitherto been less attention afforded to the nature of this relationship in regard to the wider immigrant-origin population of the UK, a demographic which includes both BAME individuals and white people with an immigrant background.

To examine substantive representation regarding the immigration-origin population, this thesis uses parliamentary questions for written answer submitted during the 2010-15 Parliament. This procedural device is used by MPs to investigate, monitor and scrutinise the government’s record, highlight constituency matters and to obtain information on issues and policies of interest to individual MPs. By using data derived from these parliamentary questions, it was possible to establish whether or not British Members of Parliament (MPs) were more likely to have substantively represented the interests of members of the British public who are likewise of immigrant heritage.

Its findings demonstrate that immigrant-origin MPs were no more, and were in some cases less likely to have substantively represented the interests of immigrant-origin individuals than their native British parliamentary colleagues. This suggests that descriptive representation is not essential in ensuring that substantive outcomes beneficial to a particular demographic(s) can be achieved. However, BAME MPs, who almost entirely qualified as being of immigrant- origin by the definition used in this study, exhibited a greater tendency to represent matters of interest to individuals from an immigrant background than white MPs, irrespective of their background.

Chapter 1. Introduction

Over the years, there has been a consistent belief that a national legislature ought to be a ‘microcosm’ of the wider society that it has been elected to represent. As Hanna Pitkin (1967: 73) wrote: ‘The idea that a representative assembly should be a condensation of the whole nation is a venerable one’. In other words, national legislatures should, ideally, reflect or resemble the nation in a way that ensures that different demographics, such as men and women, members of racial, ethnic and religious minorities, different socio-economic classes plus other societal groups are represented among members of the legislature in numbers that are relative to their share of the general population (see Ibid., 60-91). 1

While a number of countries around the world have introduced initiatives such as female parliamentary candidate quotas in addition to measures that ensure that a certain percentage of parliamentary seats are reserved specifically for female or ethnic minority legislators (Htun, 2004; Krook & O'Brien, 2010), many national legislatures, including the British House of Commons, do not descriptively resemble the diversity of the nation as a whole. Legislators have typically been drawn from societal ‘elites’; they tend to be better educated and have worked in professional occupations prior to holding elected office. Additionally, they are more likely to be male and belong to the majority ethnic group within society. On the other hand, women, ethnic and religious minorities, individuals with fewer formal qualifications and from a lower socio-economic background are often descriptively underrepresented among office holders (see, e.g., Dancygier et al., 2015; Hakhverdian, 2015; Krook, 2010).

Academic and non-academic discourse has generally focused on the underrepresentation of these aforementioned groups in electoral politics; specifically, how increasing their descriptive representation will enhance the quality of the representation of their interests (Mansbridge, 1999, 2003). With reference to the British Parliament, less attention, however, has been afforded to the immigrant-origin population which constitutes a sizeable and growing proportion of the overall British population. Furthermore, this demographic is descriptively underrepresented among Members of Parliament (MPs) and individuals from an immigrant background face certain disadvantages in relation to different issues and policy

1 For the sake of clarity, it should be noted, as the following chapter discusses in more detail, that Pitkin had issues with a purely ‘microcosmic’ view of representation. Citing her here was to highlight the fact that this particular view of representation is indeed one which is ‘venerable’ as opposed to one which was conceived more recently.

16 areas. As discussed later in the chapter, it is for these reasons, in addition to others, that research into the substantive representation of individuals of immigrant-origin is merited.

Main Research Question & Project Overview

There is an implicit, sometimes explicit, assumption that societal groups which have traditionally been descriptively underrepresented, or in certain cases marginalised or even excluded from electoral office, are best served by elected officials with whom they share similar characteristics or traits (Dovi, 2002; Mansbridge, 1999, 2003 & 2011; Rehfeld, 2011). These characteristics and traits may include race or ethnicity, gender, occupation or socioeconomic status (Mansbridge, 1999). This is predicated on the belief that the presence of these groups within a legislative body will enhance the policy deliberation and implementation processes as it will increase the likelihood that their interests are properly articulated and defended (Mansbridge, 1999, 2003; Phillips, 1998). It is, therefore, considered to be important that groups which have been traditionally underrepresented among office holders or even prevented from holding political office are not only descriptively represented but also descriptively represented in numbers that more closely correspond with their share of the wider population.

Consequently, research into the substantive representation of the immigrant-origin population of the UK is merited. As documented throughout this thesis, individuals from an immigrant background have interests that differ from the native British population in relation to different issues and areas of policy, such as health, discrimination, crime and the labour market. According to this normative literature on the political representation of underrepresented groups, we would, therefore, expect to find that immigrant-origin individuals will have their interests best represented by elected officials who are themselves from an immigrant background. Extant research has found that MPs belonging to an ethnic minority have been more likely to have substantively represented the interests of ethnic minority individuals (Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013). However, it is less clear whether MPs from an immigrant background, which includes MPs of both white and non- white ethnicity, have substantively represented the interests of British citizens and residents who likewise come from an immigrant background.

The primary objective of this dissertation is, therefore, to determine whether or not there was evidence of this occurring in practice during a recent five-year parliamentary term, namely, the 2010-15 Parliament. This will be done by exploring whether or not, and the extent to which, immigrant-origin MPs represented the interests of immigrant-origin individuals in

17 relation to several different policy areas through the use of parliamentary questions for written answer. This is a device used by MPs outside of the government to acquire information, to monitor or scrutinise the government’s record and to draw attention to matters of concern and or relevance to constituents (Franklin & Norton, 1993; Hansard, 2010; Russo & Wiberg, 2010). As addressed later, using parliamentary questions as opposed to say, voting records, to explore the association between descriptive and substantive representation, has been an approach favoured by researchers (see, e.g., Martin, 2011; Russo & Wiberg, 2010; Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013) because they provide more accurate and nuanced insights into individual legislators’ attitudes owing to the lack of centralised control over the formulation of questions process (Martin, 2011).

As indicated in the dissertation’s title, this project ‘looks beyond’ the descriptive representation of immigrant-origin parliamentarians, i.e. the number of immigrant-origin MPs and instead focuses on the actions taken by these MPs to represent immigrant-origin citizens and residents. The emphasis is, thus, not on who the representative is but more importantly, on what the representative does (Meier & England, 1984). In addition, this thesis pursues two additional or ‘secondary’ lines of inquiry; first, are the interests of immigrant- origin individuals’ best represented by ethnic minority MPs as opposed to immigrant-origin white MPs? Second, how influential are local factors, such as constituency demographics, or, for instance, measures of social deprivation in shaping how likely MPs are to substantively represent the interests of immigrant-origin individuals?

At this juncture, it is appropriate to justify the selection of the four ‘policy areas’ used in this thesis. While there were a number of different policy areas which could have been used to explore descriptive and substantive representation in regard to individuals of immigrant- origin, this study has opted to focus on four specific ones. Firstly, there is considerable scholarly interest in each of these issues and empirical research has demonstrated that I.O. individuals can be at a greater disadvantage than native Britons in relation to each of these. Moving on to the policy areas themselves, cardiovascular disease and mental health were selected as policy areas because both are linked to people’s health, wellbeing and, in some cases, have implications for their mortality. Similarly, the labour market has been selected as a policy area because access to employment is linked to an individual’s health and prosperity. Meanwhile, crime constitutes one of the policy areas because of the effect it can have on an individual, an individual’s property and on their residential area. Finally, prejudice/discrimination has been included as one of the policy areas because disadvantages minority groups face can, at least in part, be attributed to discrimination and other forms of prejudice in, for example, the labour market and the criminal justice system.

These particular policy areas have been selected because they are considered to be of significant importance to the I.O. population in terms of their wellbeing and aspirations.

Why the study of substantive representation of immigrant-origin individuals is both important and topical

Investigating the substantive representation of the immigrant-origin population is salient and topical for several reasons. First and foremost, the proportion of the overall UK population who are either themselves immigrants or who come from a recent immigrant background is higher than it has been in previous decades. By way of illustration, data from the 2001 and 2011 Censuses have shown that the number of individuals who do not identify as ‘white British’ has grown while demographic projections indicate that the UK will continue to become a more diverse society in the coming years and decades (Coleman, 2013). As demonstrated in Figures. 1.1 and 1.2, while the number of people belonging to certain ethnic groups, such as Irish and Afro-Caribbean, has declined or stagnated, there has been significant growth in the number of black Africans, individuals of mixed white and non-white ethnicity and people who identify as ‘Other White’. One of the primary reasons for this growth in the number of people who identify as the latter has been due, as discussed later, to the expansion of the European Union in 2004 to include former, predominantly, Communist states in Central and Eastern Europe (Vargas-Silva & Markaki, 2017). In addition to these more recent changes, Irish nationals and UK citizens with family ties to the Irish Republic have constituted one of the largest and oldest immigrant-origin communities within the UK (Hickman, 1998).

Figure 1. 1. Ethnic Groups, 2001 – 2011, England and Wales 2 3

Irish Gypsy or Irish Travaller Other White White & Black Caribbean White & Asian White & Black African Other Mixed Indian Pakistani 2001 Bangladeshi 2011 Chinese Other Asian Black African Black Caribbean Other Black Arab Other ethnic group 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Source: Census - Office for National Statistics (ONS)

Figure 1. 2. Ethnic Groups, 2001 – 2011, Scotland

Irish

Other White

Mixed/multiple ethnic groups

Pakistani

Indian 2001 Bangladeshi 2011 Chinese

Other Asian

Black African/Caribbean/Other Black

Other ethnic group

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 Source: National Records of Scotland

2 Data for White British have been excluded in both charts. 3 Arab and Gypsy/Irish Traveller were not included as categories in the 2001 England & Wales Census; hence, only figures from the 2011 Census are available.

Often, academic and non-academic attention has tended to focus on the proportion of ethnic minorities in electoral politics, while simultaneously emphasising the importance of increasing the number of BAME representatives so that the proportion of BAME legislators corresponds with the proportion of the general public who identify as BAME. This is considered important because the underrepresentation of ethnic minority legislators may affect the overall quality of ethnic minority representation (Mansbridge, 1999, 2003).

However, less scholarly attention has been afforded to members of other minority groups, such as individuals from an immigrant background. Relatively speaking, immigrant-origin individuals constitute a sizeable and noticeable ‘community’ in British and other Western societies; therefore, it is appropriate to further develop our understanding of this demographic and whether or not legislators who descriptively represent these individuals have substantively represented their interests. In addition, the proportion of immigrant-origin MPs could be set to rise if political parties continue the trend of selecting ethnic minority candidates in safe parliamentary seats, a strategy employed by the Conservative Party over the last decade (Sobolewska, 2013). This guarantees that MPs can enjoy long, stable political careers as the risk of defeat is minimal under the UK’s majoritarian, first-past-the- post electoral system. Even if the proportion of immigrant-origin MPs does not rise significantly during future election cycles, the proportion of MPs who are categorised as immigrant-origin or who have some history of immigration in their families could remain constant in the coming years. This, in turn, provides researchers with further opportunities to assess more closely and more accurately the actions and activities undertaken by these representatives to substantively represent those whom they descriptively represent.

Before continuing with this introductory chapter, it is first important to clarify what is meant by a number of different terms. Firstly, ‘immigrant-origin individuals’, ‘immigrant-origin communities’ and ‘immigrant-origin population’ are all terms which are used interchangeably throughout this dissertation and refer to all individuals residing in the United Kingdom who were either immigrants to the country or who have, or had, at least one parent who was a national of another country. In other words, ‘immigrant-origin’ refers to individuals who are at most one generation removed from immigration to the UK. Naturally, this encompasses a broad spectrum consisting of millions of people currently residing in the UK which includes both British and foreign nationals and individuals of different ethnicities.

Meanwhile, individuals who are not immigrant-origin by the definition used in this study are referred to by a number of different terms. ‘Native’ and ‘indigenous’ are similarly all used to refer to residents and citizens of the UK who do not come from an immigrant background or do not have a parent who was or still is a foreign national. Finally, a number of different terms are employed, again interchangeably, when making reference to individuals with non-

21 white heritage. These include ‘ethnic minority(ies)’, ‘minority ethnic’, ‘non-white’ and black, Asian and minority ethnic or ‘BAME’.

The Immigrant-Origin Population of the UK

The United Kingdom has had a long history of immigration. For many centuries, one of the most prominent and longstanding immigrant communities has been the Irish, who up until the ‘New Commonwealth’ immigration that occurred between the 1950s and early 1980s, constituted the largest ethnic group in Britain after the native British (MacRaild, 1999). In addition to Irish migration, migrations to Britain in earlier centuries have included peoples fleeing persecution in their native lands, such as French Huguenots and Jews from Central and Eastern Europe (McKay, 2016). Although immigrants and their descendants have been part of British society for many centuries, it has been during the post-Second World War era that the presence of immigration has become more apparent in British society. This began with the arrival, peaking in the 1950s and early 1960s, of immigrants from Caribbean islands such as Jamaica and Barbados which were, at the time, still part of the British Empire. This was followed by the arrival of migrants from the South Asian nations of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh which had previously gained their independence from Britain (Spencer, 1997). A minority of ethnically South Asian immigrants also arrived from east African nations, most notably Uganda and Kenya where their families had previously settled (Heath et al., 2013).

More recently, the expansion of the European Union in May 2004 to include former communist states in eastern and central Europe has been instrumental in increasing the numbers of white immigrants from what are referred to as the A8 4 countries; in particular, Poland. Since 2004, Poles have become one of the largest and fastest growing migrant populations in the country (Burrell, 2009). Other more recent migrations to the UK have included immigrants from nations such as Nigeria, Ghana and Somalia in addition to China, France, Australia and New Zealand (Ibid.).

As the post-war history of the UK has demonstrated, the country has, over the course of recent decades, become a more multicultural and multi-ethnic nation. As a result, many millions of present-day inhabitants of the UK have recent familial connections to a country outside the UK; either they are themselves immigrants or they are the child or grandchild of immigrants to the country.

4 Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia & Slovenia.

How large is the immigrant-origin population?

Determining the exact size and composition of the UK immigrant-origin population is a difficult task owing to the absence of readily available data outlining who qualifies as ‘immigrant-origin’ by the definition employed in this dissertation. While official statistics provide useful data such as both the number and percentage of the population who are foreign-born, these data are, on their own, insufficient as they do not provide us with information on the substantial number of people in British society who are British born and bred but who are the children of an immigrant parent or parents. Ethnicity data, however, allows us to make more accurate estimates of what proportion of British society are ‘immigrant-origin’ as these data include both British-born and foreign-born I.O. individuals.

While not everyone who describes their ethnicity as anything other than ‘white British’ will qualify as immigrant-origin, we have good reasons to assume that many people who are not ‘white British’ could be categorised as immigrant-origin. Firstly, most of the non-white immigration to the UK has occurred relatively recently, occurring, for the most part from the 1950s onward. Consequently, many people with non-white heritage residing in the UK are no more than one generation removed from immigration; either they were immigrants themselves or they are or were the children of one or two immigrant parents. Similarly, it is likely that many of those who identified as ‘Other White’ (see Table 1.1) qualify as being of immigrant-origin owing to the fact that there was significant growth in white, continental European immigration between the 2001 and 2011 Censuses (see Figures 1.1 and 1.2). Furthermore, although there has been a history of Irish immigration going back centuries, data suggest that many people of Irish ethnicity were born in the Irish Republic and later immigrated to the UK (Savage, 2013). A further significant proportion of people of Irish ethnicity will have been born in the UK to Irish parents (Maybin, 2016).

However, it is important to note that ethnicity data do not provide an entirely accurate and reliable illustration of the profile of the I.O. population of the country. To begin with, many younger BAME Britons will be an additional generation removed from immigration; in other words, many will be the grandchildren of immigrants. This may be particularly prevalent among young Britons of full or partial Afro-Caribbean descent as Afro-Caribbeans were, as mentioned earlier, among the first non-white communities to settle in the UK in the latter half of the twentieth century. In addition, the fact that the British-Irish community is one of the oldest and more established immigrant communities (MacRaild, 1999) means that it is possible that there will be Britons of Irish descent whose connection to the Irish Republic goes back several generations but who identify ethnically as Irish. As their link to Ireland is more distant than others who make up the British-Irish community, these individuals would

23 thus be categorised as ‘native’ rather than ‘immigrant-origin’ according to this dissertation’s definition.

British Jews represent a similar case to Britons with more distant Irish ancestry insofar as Jewish migration to the UK peaked in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century and later during the 1930s (Kushner, 2009). Consequently, many British Jews would not be considered as immigrant-origin owing to the fact that they are several generations removed from immigration. However, when declaring their ethnicity for the Census and other public records, many British Jews may identify as ‘Other White’. This could prove problematic when trying to determine who is and who is not of immigrant-origin. This is because if we categorise people of ‘Other White’ ethnicity as immigrant-origin then significant numbers of British Jews would be considered as such when, in fact, many UK Jews would qualify as ‘native British’ since their family’s residence in the country goes back several generations. Similarly, many individuals of Gypsy or Traveller origin will belong to families who have been living in the country for at least several generations and so will not qualify as immigrant- origin but as native when applying the definition employed in this thesis (Smith & Greenfields, 2012).

Finally, using ethnicity data to estimate the size of the immigrant-origin demographic is problematic because, as the footnote on the following page details, it is difficult to ascertain accurate figures for the native and immigrant-origin populations of the whole of the United Kingdom as opposed to just Great Britain. This is because Northern Ireland is the only part of the UK that has not provided more than one ‘white’ category in its Census. Hence, it is harder to determine what proportion of the white population of Northern Ireland qualifies as immigrant-origin.

If we work on the premise that everyone, who described their ethnicity as anything other than white British in the 2011 Census, was predominantly of immigrant-origin then the number of I.O. individuals resident in the UK in 2011 was approximately 11.4 million. As shown below in Figure 1.4, this figure accounted for a sizeable proportion of the British population, approximately one in five people. Yet, as the discussion in this section of the chapter has highlighted, this figure needs to be viewed with caution because it is possible that this is an overestimation of the number of people who are of immigrant-origin as defined in this study. That being said, individuals whose immigrant roots are more distant, for example, in the grandparents’ generation or beyond, may nonetheless feel that they are distinct; culturally, religiously, racially and or ethnically from the majority native population regardless of the fact that their family’s history of immigration is more distant than those whose family experience of immigration is more recent.

Although ethnicity data may not serve as an ideal means by which to estimate who is and who is not an individual of immigrant-origin, it nevertheless provides an estimate of the size and profile of the immigrant-origin population. What this discussion demonstrates is that the people in the UK who are either immigrants themselves or who come from a recent immigrant family background constitute a sizeable minority demographic in British society.

Table 1. 1. Population of the United Kingdom by ethnicity, 2011 Census 5 Ethnic Group Number Percentage (%) White British 49,997,473 81.47

Irish 585,177 0.95

Other White (incl. 2,711,152 4.42 Gypsy/Traveller)

Mixed 6 1,250,229 2.03

Asian: Indian 1,451,862 2.36

Asian: Pakistani or 1,626,512 2.65 Bangladeshi

Asian: Chinese or 1,294,965 2.09 Other Asian

Black: African 1,021,611 1.66

Black: Caribbean & 1.44 Other Black 883,073

Other Ethnic Group 580,374 0.94

TOTAL 63,182,178 7 100.00

Source: ‘2011 Census: Ethnic group, local authorities in the United Kingdom’. Office for National Statistics. 11 October 2013. Data for ‘Other White’ categories used in Scotland obtained via: https://www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/ods- analyser/jsf/tableView/tableView.xhtml (accessed 4 October 2018).

5 The figures for the White British, Irish and Other White categories are the figures for Great Britain as opposed to the United Kingdom because Northern Ireland only provides one ‘White’ category for its residents in its Census. 6 ‘Mixed’ includes data from the following 2011 Census categories: White & Black Caribbean, White & Black African, White & Asian and Mixed: Other. 7 Note: this is the figure for the entire UK population as observed in the 2011 Census.

Figure 1. 3. Population of United Kingdom by ethnicity, 2011 Census

White British

Irish

Other White (incl. Gyspsy/Traveller) Mixed

Indian

Pakistani & Bangladeshi

Chinese & Other Asian

Black African

Black Caribbean & Other Black Other Ethnic Group

Figure 1. 4. Estimated sizes of the native & immigrant-origin populations of the UK

19.5%

Native Immigrant-Origin

81.5%

Over the years, a number of parliamentarians who came from recent immigrant family backgrounds have sat in the British House of Commons. Notable examples include the nineteenth-century Conservative Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli, who was of Italian Jewish

26 descent and twentieth-century Tory counterparts Winston Churchill and Harold Macmillan, both of whom were the sons of American mothers (Thorpe, 2011). In the earlier half of the twentieth century, Jewish MPs were present in Parliament (Kadish, 1992; Rich, 2016). More recently, there have been a number MPs from a white immigrant background who have had family connections to the Irish Republic, continental Europe, the United States and nations of the ‘Old Commonwealth’ such as Australia. 8

The history of ethnic minority representation in the House of Commons has, however, been less consistent. In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, the first three MPs from an ethnic minority immigrant background were elected to the House of Commons; however, for several decades during the twentieth century, the Commons lacked any ethnic minority representation. This, however, changed following the 1987 general election when four BAME MPs, all from the Labour Party, were elected to the Commons (Heath et al., 2013). 9 The number of BAME MPs grew steadily throughout the 1990s and 2000s until 2010. The general election of that year proved to be something of a watershed moment for ethnic minority representation at Westminster when 27 MPs from a minority ethnic background were elected to the House of Commons (Heath et al., 2013). This figure subsequently increased to 41 and then to 52 MPs following the 2015 and 2017 general elections respectively (Katwala, 2017).

In this study, the definition of ‘immigrant-origin’ outlined earlier is also applied to Members of Parliament. MPs categorised as immigrant-origin who served during the 2010-15 Parliament, like the wider British immigrant-origin population, came from a diverse range of backgrounds. They included Shailesh Vara (Con, North West Cambridgeshire) who was born in Uganda to Indian Gujarati parents and who immigrated to the UK with his family as a young child. Other examples include Gloria De Piero (Lab, Ashfield) who is the daughter of Italian immigrants and the former Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg (Lib Dem, Sheffield Hallam) who was born in Buckinghamshire to a British father and a Dutch mother. As mentioned in the footnote immediately below, a full list of all immigrant-origin MPs, including information on their party membership, constituency and immediate family background, is available in Appendix I.

As shown below in Table 1.2, among the 669 MPs who served during the 2010-15 Parliament, 76 (11.4 per cent) were of immigrant-origin by this definition. 10 Considering that an estimated 19.5 per cent of the population of the United Kingdom is of immigrant origin

8 For details on the family backgrounds of all immigrant-origin MPs who served during the 2010-15 Parliament, see Appendix I. 9 These MPs were Diane Abbott (Hackney North & Stoke Newington), Paul Boateng (Brent South), Bernie Grant (Tottenham) and Keith Vaz (Leicester East). 10 Following the 2010 general election, 650 MPs were elected to the House of Commons. A further 19 entered the House later during the five-year Parliament as replacements for MPs who had either died or resigned.

(Figure 1.4), individuals who come from an immigrant background were descriptively underrepresented during the 2010-15 Parliament. Among the Members who served during this Parliament, there was considerable variation between parties in terms of how many of their MPs were from an immigrant background. A total of 42 Labour MPs were of immigrant- origin, constituting 15.4 per cent of the parliamentary Labour Party; in contrast, 29 Conservative MPs were of immigrant-origin, equating to 9.4 per cent of all Conservative MPs. By this metric, the Liberal Democrats were the least diverse of the three largest parties in the Parliament; only three of their parliamentary party were of immigrant-origin, accounting for just 5.5 per cent of all Liberal Democrat MPs. Furthermore, as Table 1.3 shows, none of these three MPs was from a minority ethnic background.

Table 1. 2. Family background of MPs serving during the 2010-15 Parliament by political party Labour Conservative Liberal Other Total % Democrat

Native 230 278 55 30 593 88.6 British

Immigrant- 42 29 3 2 76 11.4 Origin Source: Data collected as part of the ORA: Pathways project. 11

Using data presented above in Table 1.1, the white immigrant-origin population of the UK was estimated, at the time of the 2011 Census, to be approximately 3.3 million, or 5.4 per cent of the overall UK population. 12 As Table 1.3 demonstrates, white immigrant-origin MPs accounted for 49 (7.3 per cent) of all MPs who served during the 2010-15 Parliament. As a result, individuals from a white migratory background are more or less descriptively represented according to their share of the wider British population. Ethnic minorities, on the other hand, were descriptively underrepresented in the 2010-15 Parliament. In 2011, 8.1 million people of a minority ethnic background were residing in the UK, equating to 13.2 per cent of the total population. However, as illustrated in Table 1.3, a total of 27 ethnic minority immigrant-origin MPs served in the 2010-15 Parliament, accounting for just 4 per cent of all MPs who served during the Parliament.

11 Pathways is a pan-European study into the representation of the immigrant-origin population in eight European democracies. For further information see http://pathways.eu/ (accessed 23 August 2017). 12 The 3.3 million figure was calculated by adding together the number of individuals who identified as Other White, Irish or Gypsy/Traveller in the 2011 Census.

Table 1. 3. Immigrant-Origin MPs serving during the 2010-15 Parliament by ethnicity Labour Conservative Liberal Other Total % Democrat

I.O. White 26 18 3 2 49 64.5

BAME 16 11 0 0 27 35.5 Source: Data collected as part of the ORA: Pathways project.

When discussing immigrant-origin MPs, it is important to consider their biographies and personal circumstances and what these could mean for the substantive representation of I.O. individuals. First, certain I.O. white MPs come from ‘elite’ backgrounds or at least backgrounds that are advantageous when pursuing both professional and political careers. The 2010-15 Parliament, for example, included I.O. MPs such Hilary Benn (Lab, Leeds Central), the son of the late Labour cabinet minister Tony Benn and Zac Goldsmith (Con, Richmond Park) whose father was the financier Sir James Goldsmith. Clearly, politicians such as these have backgrounds and circumstances which are markedly different from, for instance, recently arrived Eastern European manual workers. As a result, these MPs may not necessarily view themselves as representing the interests of or as the representatives of others from a migratory background. In a similar fashion, as referred to later in the Theory chapter, many BAME MPs could be seen as ‘elitist’ when compared to other ethnic minorities and indeed people from various white backgrounds owing to their educational and occupational backgrounds. Consequently, BAME MPs may likewise not regard themselves as representing the interests of BAME individuals or for that matter others with migrant heritage.

That being said, legislators who do not descriptively represent a particular group may nonetheless see themselves as representatives of that group, as outlined later in the Theory chapter. In a similar manner, MPs who do descriptively represent others on the basis of their family background but do not descriptively represent many other group members due to their having a more privileged socioeconomic status may still wish to substantively represent those belonging to their group.

Descriptive & Substantive Representation

This thesis has thus far made reference to both descriptive and substantive representation without explaining in any significant detail what is meant by both of these forms of representation. This short section, therefore, provides brief definitions of these terms. Further detail and discussion are, meanwhile, provided in the following chapter.

Descriptive representation refers to incidents or situations wherein a legislator is ‘standing for’ a certain group or demographic, whereas substantive representation, on the other hand, refers to incidents when representatives are ‘acting for’ a group in question (Celis & Childs, 2008; Pitkin 1967). Substantive representation is, hence, distinct from descriptive representation as it focuses on representatives' actions, attitudes and beliefs rather than their traits and or characteristics. To paraphrase Meier & England (1984: 393), this form of representation goes beyond simply being someone; instead, it is about doing something. In the context of this thesis, an immigrant-origin Member of Parliament ‘descriptively represents’ members of the public who likewise come from a recent immigrant background, although he or she does not automatically qualify as a ‘substantive representative’ unless they have acted in ways which are beneficial to individuals from an immigrant background. Similarly, a native British parliamentarian would have to have demonstrated similar actions or behaviour in order to be considered as a substantive representative. In this thesis, substantive representation, as I will explain later, is measured by determining the likelihood of MPs to submit a higher proportion of parliamentary questions for written answer that address matters that are in the interests of individuals from an immigrant background.

The Wider Literature on Descriptive and Substantive Representation

As mentioned previously, there is a consistent belief within the theoretical literature that descriptive representation enhances substantive representation. Mansbridge (1999: 628) states that ‘better communication and experiential knowledge of descriptive representatives’ improves deliberation and representation within a legislative setting.

In a similar vein, Rehfeld (2011: 639) has suggested that electors desire or ‘should want’ representatives who are distinctive in many ways so that those representatives are ‘more likely to achieve those shared goals’. To Mansbridge (2003: 523), descriptive representatives are more predisposed to provide substantive representation because their life experiences as a member of a group render them more likely to be sensitive to the

30 issues relating to members of a particular group. In addition, Mansbridge (1999) contends that descriptive representatives are more likely to provide substantive representation at times when the interests of underrepresented and or marginalised groups are ‘uncrystallised’ because when this occurs, descriptive representatives, by drawing on their own personal experiences, are more likely to be better able to ascertain where their group’s interests lie and then to represent these interests accordingly.

In addition to emphasising the importance of shared experiences, the theoretical literature has also promoted the theory that individuals from minority and or underrepresented groups possess a shared sense of solidarity (or ‘group consciousness’) which is borne out of a belief that they are distinct from the majority population (Dawson, 1994; Heath et al., 2013; Stokes- Brown, 2006; Wolfinger, 1965). Group consciousness is, in turn, similar to and tied to linked fate, a theoretical concept which can be summarised as a belief that one's individual chances in life are closely tied to the fortunes of the wider group (Dawson, 1994; Gamble, 2007; Tate, 1993; 2003). Although linked fate has often been discussed in relation to minority ethnic or racial groups, a broadly similar theory was adopted to explain working- class support for the British Labour Party (Butler & Stokes, 1974).

Similarly, it has been theorised that legislators who are members of an underrepresented group also possess a sense of group consciousness. This motivates these legislators to work on advancing causes which are aimed at improving the wellbeing of the community or demographic to which they believe that they belong and or with whom they identify (Gamble, 2007). This may lead representatives to feel that they represent a ‘wider constituency’ consisting of others who share their traits and characteristics across the country and not just those individuals who reside in their electoral constituencies (Fenno, 2003; Mansbridge, 2003; Swain, 1993). In British politics, research has observed that certainly among MPs from a minority ethnic background, there is evidence that BAME MPs feel a responsibility to represent members of the public who likewise come from a minority ethnic background (Nixon, 1998; Sobolewska, McKee & Campbell, 2018). Consequently, this suggests that group consciousness exists among parliamentary candidates and MPs who belong to an ethnic minority, which may, in turn, lead these MPs to substantively represent the interests of others who come from a minority ethnic background.

When it comes to studying the association between descriptive and substantive representation, much scholarly attention, as noted above, has been paid to the descriptive representation of ethnic minorities, with a common narrative being centred on the numbers of minority ethnic representatives relative to their share of the population (Fieldhouse & Sobolewska, 2013). Indeed, it has been argued by the same authors that the greater scholarly focus on descriptive representation is a result of the data available and the ‘ease

31 with which scholars can quantify’ it (Ibid: 329). However, there also exists a substantial empirical literature which has sought to establish whether there is indeed truth behind this normative assumption. Often, this has been explored in relation to ethnic minorities (Geese, Goldbach & Saalfeld, 2016; Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013) and women (Bratton & Ray, 2002) and religious minorities, specifically Muslims and Jews (Kolpinskaya, 2017).

When researchers have sought to study the nature of this relationship, they have employed different methods, by, for example, monitoring how legislators have voted on certain issues as a means to assess substantive representation (Bullock & MacManus, 1981; Swain, 1993; Whitby, 1997). Or, as in the case of Broockman (2013), by sending emails from putative ‘black and ‘white’ aliases to members of American state legislatures and using responses as a means to quantify substantive representation.

Although it is broadly recognised that descriptive representation is an important normative standard of democratic representation, it is important to emphasise that descriptive representation has been identified as being one of several (contested) normative standards of democratic representation. As covered in greater depth in the subsequent chapter, descriptive representation is primarily concerned with the characteristics and traits of elected representatives as opposed to their actions and behaviour. Moreover, descriptive representation lacks a mechanism whereby representative accountability can be measured and or determined (Urbinati & Warren, 2008; Mansbridge, 1999). Consequently, many theorists have cautioned against focusing too heavily on descriptive representation. While acknowledging its use and value, descriptive representation does not, on its own, ensure adequate democratic representation for groups underrepresented in politics (see, e.g., Phillips, 1998; Pitkin, 1967; Sapiro, 1981; Williams, 1998).

Originality and Contribution

Overall, this dissertation makes several contributions to the wider literature; firstly, research investigating the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation minority groups in British politics has, to date, focused on ethnic and or ‘visible’ minorities (Geese, Goldbach & Saalfeld, 2016; Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013; Saalfeld & Kyriakopoulou, 2011) or religious minorities, namely Muslims and Jews (Kolpinskaya, 2017). By focusing on both members of the public and MPs from an immigrant background, which includes individuals and parliamentarians of non-British, white European heritage in addition to BAME MPs, this dissertation makes a contribution to the wider literature by focusing on a

32 larger segment of the British population than has hitherto been investigated in existing research into minority group representation in the United Kingdom.

Secondly, through its employment of a different range of issues by which to quantify substantive representation; namely, by departing from the focus on issues that are not automatically regarded as ‘immigrant’ or ‘minority’ issues such as matters to do with racial and ethnic diversity and problems which may be encountered when immigrating to the UK used in the literature cited at the start of this section. Instead, this dissertation makes an additional contribution to the literature by using issues and policy areas which, while not specific or pertaining largely to immigrant-origin individuals, can nevertheless be viewed as ‘immigrant-origin interests’. This is due to the documented disparities and disadvantages that have been found to exist, as this dissertation will go on to outline, between the immigrant- origin and native British populations.

A further contribution that this study makes is a methodological one; namely, it explores both the content of and the rationale and motivation behind MPs’ parliamentary questions. By doing so, this dissertation conducts some early analysis into the types of words and language that have appeared in parliamentary questions for written answer.

Fourthly, it presents data that challenges the premise that local and or constituency factors are significant in influencing MPs to substantively represent the interests of I.O. individuals. Additionally, by finding that the size of an MP’s electoral majority had no effect on MPs’ tendencies to represent the interests of I.O. individuals, the notion that electoral majorities play a part in shaping how MPs carry out their work to represent members of the public is called into question. Furthermore, by observing that having relevant experience and knowledge is an important factor in determining an MP’s likelihood of substantively representing the interests of I.O. individuals in relation to several different policy areas, this thesis encourages us to consider the effect that these factors have on MPs’ willingness to represent other matters pertaining to immigrant communities.

Lastly, it makes two contributions to the literature on group consciousness. Firstly, it provides evidence to support other research into group consciousness among BAME British MPs (Jones et al., 2015; Nixon, 1998; McKee, 2017; Sobolewska, McKee & Campbell, 2018). It observes that MPs belonging to an ethnic minority demonstrated a greater likelihood of submitting more questions pertaining to the interests of ethnic minorities and also other I.O. individuals. Secondly, it presents findings which indicate that a form of ‘cross-group’ consciousness may be present among BAME Members of Parliament.

Methodology

Different approaches to measuring substantive representation in extant literature

When reviewing existing research into the substantive representation of underrepresented groups, two different approaches to measuring this form of representation can be identified. Studies which have adopted the ‘first’ approach have assessed whether legislators have represented the political beliefs, opinions and preferences of a certain group(s) (i.e. women, ethnic minorities) through, say, their voting records. If the group being studied is, for example, generally more supportive of liberal asylum policies and practices then legislators who voted for more liberal asylum policies and practices would be considered to have substantively represented the group being studied. While this approach is undoubtedly useful in certain research, it appears, as outlined later in Chapter 4, to be more limited when conducting the kind of research undertaken in this dissertation because the attitudes of UK minorities do not, as a general rule, differ greatly from those held by the native British population (Heath et al., 2013). As a result, one would be unable to determine whether legislators are representing the views, preferences and perspectives of a minority group or of members of society in general.

Meanwhile, studies which have followed the ‘second’ approach have, conversely, analysed legislators’ tendencies to represent issues and policies which are in the ‘interests’ of the group under investigation. This has been done by documenting how and where there are disparities between the minority and or underrepresented group being studied and the rest of society. It uses a form of legislative activity such as voting records or parliamentary questions to gauge legislators’ responsiveness to these issues and policies. If, for instance, the group in question is known to be more likely to experience social deprivation then actions and measures taken to reduce social deprivation are, therefore, considered to be in the interests of the particular group.

By using issues and areas of policy in which research has observed disparities between the immigrant and native populations of the UK in order to investigate whether or not I.O. parliamentarians have substantively represented I.O. individuals’ interests, this thesis adheres to the second of these two aforementioned approaches. The fourth chapter of this thesis provides a more detailed discussion on these two approaches to measuring substantive representation. Along with the later individual policy area chapters (Chapters 5- 8), it also gives further detail on where disparities exist with regard to these policy areas and

34 how action taken by MPs to address these can constitute substantive representation for individuals of immigrant-origin.

Using parliamentary questions for written answer to quantify substantive representation

Researchers seeking to assess the nature of the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation in legislatures such as the British House of Commons have a number of options available to them when deciding upon how they should go about quantifying substantive representation.

This is because Members of Parliament engage in a variety of different activities upon which assessments could be made as to how MPs have substantively represented a given demographic or section of society. These include casting votes, making speeches within the parliamentary chamber and submitting (or ‘tabling’), oral and written questions to members of the executive. While a number of American-based studies have used roll call votes cast by Members of Congress or state legislators as a means to measure substantive representation (see, e.g., Bullock & MacManus, 1981; Swain, 1993; Whitby, 1997) this approach is, however, less viable when studying a legislature such as the British House of Commons where party discipline is more tightly enforced. Hence, British MPs will generally vote as they are instructed to do so by their party, although instances of dissent have increased in recent decades (Cowley & Stuart, 2012). Owing to MPs’ propensity to ‘toe the party line’, opportunities to conduct a thorough and meaningful analysis of the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation using voting records are thus limited. As a result of the higher levels of party discipline in many European legislatures, studies examining substantive representation in national-level European politics have tended to use parliamentary questions (see, e.g., Martin, 2011; Russo & Wiberg, 2010; Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013). As noted earlier, these are questions which are submitted to the government, often to gain information about a particular issue and to draw ministers’ attention to matters of relevance to their constituencies (Franklin & Norton, 1993; Russo & Wiberg, 2010).

This dissertation uses parliamentary questions for written answer as they serve as a more effective means to examine substantive representation than voting records or, as I will go on to explain, questions for oral answer. Crucially, questions for written answer offer a more accurate and nuanced picture of legislators’ interests, beliefs and possible agenda(s). In contrast to parliamentary votes, centralised party control over parliamentary questions

35 remains relatively low, thus allowing legislators greater freedom with fewer constraints to express individual views on various topics (Martin, 2011).

Immigrant-Origin Interests or Ethnic Minority Interests?

Most research into the disparities and disadvantages that individuals of immigrant-origin face focus on ethnic minorities as opposed to immigrant-origin individuals more broadly. As a result, the study of immigrant-origin representation poses problems to the researcher.

Poor health, both physical and mental experienced by Irish nationals and their descendants in the United Kingdom has been the subject of academic attention (see, e.g., Clucas, 2009; Das-Munshi et al., 2013; Kelleher & Hillier, 1996); however, little is known about the health of other white minorities, in particular migrants from Poland and other A8 nations in Eastern and Central Europe, who according to reports have shown high levels of depression and rates of suicide (Lakasing & Mirza, 2009).

Similarly, much of the research into crime concerns ethnic minorities and their personal experiences with criminal activity, the criminal justice system and the police. While there is some research that examines the Gypsy/Traveller community (James, 2006, 2012), attention afforded to the experiences of white minority groups has, in general, been scant (Phillips & Bowling, 2017). As discussed in later chapters, this constitutes what could be regarded as a limitation to this project. This cannot be easily overcome unless further research is done that analyses possible disparities between white immigrant-origin communities and the native British population.

Of course, few issues pertain exclusively to individuals of immigrant-origin, or indeed all members of specific immigrant-origin groups, such as the British Indian or British Romanian communities. However, as this thesis shows, there is empirical evidence demonstrating that, on average, British citizens and residents from an immigrant background are disadvantaged in certain policy areas in relation to the indigenous British population and or have certain issues that pertain to them to a greater extent.

Structure of the Dissertation

This introductory chapter is followed by a largely theoretical chapter which outlines and explores theories found within the normative literature on the political representation of underrepresented and disadvantaged groups. In addition, it discusses definitions of

36 representation and elaborates on traditional theories of representation and their relevance to this project.

The third chapter outlines in greater detail the methods employed in this dissertation. It provides information on parliamentary questions for written answer, including how they are used by MPs and what the advantages (and the potential pitfalls) are of using this parliamentary device as a means to assess substantive representation. The chapter discusses the ‘search term’ method used to identify questions that demonstrate that the MP submitting the question was providing substantive representation. It also includes an overview of the process through which parliamentary questions in the dataset were coded. Finally, this chapter outlines how corpus linguistics has been used to assist in the support and develop its overall analysis.

Chapter 4 forms the second empirical chapter of this dissertation. It serves to illustrate the objective interests of immigrant-origin individuals in relation to the policy areas that will be analysed in subsequent chapters. It uses data from three surveys: the Labour Force Survey (LFS), the Ethnic Minority British Election Survey (EMBES) and the now-defunct Citizenship Survey to investigate and to illustrate how the interests of I.O. citizens and residents differ in relation to the native population. It addresses academic discussion surrounding the existence of an ‘ethnic agenda’ in the United Kingdom (see, e.g., Dancygier & Saunders, 2006; Fitzgerald, 1987; Heath et al., 2013; Saggar, 2000; Studlar, 1986).

This chapter is followed by four empirical chapters in which the analysis and findings are presented. Each of these chapters is devoted to one of the aforementioned policy areas (health, discrimination, crime and the labour market) and uses parliamentary questions for written answer tabled over the course of the 2010-15 UK Parliament to assess the extent to which these interests were substantively represented by immigrant-origin MPs in comparison to native British MPs. Each of these chapters employs descriptive statistics and regression analysis, supplemented by corpus linguistics.

The final chapter of the dissertation summarises and brings together the findings, broader conclusions and possible interpretations from this research project. It discusses the findings and patterns that emerged from the analysis carried out in the four aforementioned policy area chapters. Overall, it finds that, in relation to the four aforementioned policy areas under investigation, immigrant-origin MPs who served during the 2010-15 Parliament did not, in fact, exhibit a greater tendency to substantively represent the interests of individuals of I.O. individuals in their parliamentary questions than native British MPs. However, it does find that BAME MPs, the vast majority of whom qualified as immigrant-origin by the definition

37 employed in this thesis, were more likely to have substantively represented these interests in their parliamentary questions than white MPs.

The concluding chapter goes on to discuss the contributions that this study has made to the wider body of literature on the substantive representation of minority and or underrepresented groups. It then provides a reflection and evaluation of the finished project and its methodology before closing by discussing the ways in which this project and similar research could be developed in the future and where possible opportunities for future research lie.

Chapter 2. The Representation of Politically Underrepresented Groups in Theoretical Literature

Normative literature on the political representation of underrepresented groups has, as has been mentioned previously, often argued that individuals belonging to groups which have been descriptively underrepresented among political officeholders, such as women, racial and ethnic minorities and individuals from lower socioeconomic classes are more likely to have their interests best represented by legislators with whom they share certain traits or characteristics (see, e.g., Dovi, 2002; Mansbridge, 1999, 2003; Phillips, 1998).

As the data presented in the previous chapter demonstrates, individuals from an immigrant background; in particular, those from a minority ethnic background were descriptively underrepresented in the UK House of Commons during the 2010-15 Parliament. Therefore, according to this theoretical assumption, immigrant-origin individuals are more likely to have their interests best represented by MPs who likewise come from an immigrant background. There are a number of theoretical arguments that have been posited that would suggest that descriptive representatives are best placed to substantively represent individuals whom they descriptively resemble. As detailed below, this literature asserts that ‘shared experiences’ (Mansbridge, 1999, 2003) and a sense of group ‘solidarity’ or group consciousness are among the primary reasons why descriptive representatives are more likely to substantively represent, promote and articulate issues and concerns that are in the interests of others who come from an underrepresented and or minority group background (see, e.g., Dawson, 1994; Stokes-Brown, 2006; Tate, 1993; Wolfinger, 1965).

In addition, this chapter outlines several theoretical arguments that challenge the notion that descriptive representation is closely linked to substantive representation. It discusses, for example, the ways in which descriptive representatives may not be best placed to represent minority and or underrepresented groups. It suggests that the likelihood of representatives, both descriptive and non-descriptive, to substantively represent the interests of I.O. individuals and other groups may partially or largely be influenced by factors such as their party membership and the profile of the constituency which they have been elected to represent.

In sum, the main purpose of this chapter is to provide an overview of a number of theoretical arguments that both support and call into question the notion that descriptively

39 underrepresented groups such as immigrant-origin individuals are more likely to be substantively represented by legislators whom they descriptively resemble. While the chapter is broadly theoretical in the sense that it draws mainly from theoretical texts, it also makes reference to certain empirical studies when outlining and discussing theoretical ideas and concepts.

Initially, however, it is important to first address what is meant by political representation.

Defining Political Representation

How can we define the term representation? Representation, in the political sense of the word, has been debated and discussed for ‘over two millennia’ (Rehfeld, 2006: 2) and has been regarded, in academic literature, as a broad, ambiguous and vague term without a fixed definition (Vieira & Runciman, 2008).

That being said, there has been a consensus among more contemporary political theorists that the main principle underlining political representation involves authorisation. Representation is, therefore, something that occurs when individuals are authorised to act and make decisions on behalf of others (Knights, 2009; Phillips, 1995; Pitkin, 1967; Rehfeld, 2006; Williams, 1998; Young, 1990). Authority is paramount, writes Pitkin (1967: 42) because an elected body can only claim to be representative if it is first given the authority to deliberate and decide by others. Tussman expanded on this ‘authorisation’ view of representation by writing that in every election electors authorise their representatives to act on their behalf in the legislature to which they are elected (quoted in Pitkin, 1967: 43). In a similar fashion, Rehfeld (2005: 185) views representation as being ‘audience-dependent’. A representative is, in other words, an individual who has been accepted by a relevant audience as being representative. While observing that, on a basic level a representative is someone who ‘stands in’ for the represented, Rehfeld (2006: 5-6) also notes that a representative does not simply stand for another; rather, they stand in to perform certain functions, such as voting on legislation, proposing regulations and advocating for particular issues or causes.

Although representation is generally believed to consist of electors authorising others to legislate and make decisions on their behalf, the main question is the extent to which the decisions made and actions taken by representatives should closely mirror the preferences of citizens who are governed by them (Rehfeld, 2009). Often, this has been framed as representatives conforming to one of two broad models. Under the trustee model, representatives are more inclined to use their own judgment when making decisions as

40 opposed to being guided by their constituents. This model is similar to the Burkean notion of representation, which derives its name from the eighteenth-century parliamentarian Edmund Burke. This holds that elected officials should pay close attention to the wishes of their constituents but should ultimately be free to exercise their own judgement when making decisions and should not simply act as delegates of the people whom they have been elected to represent (Eulau et al., 1959; Judge, 1999; Wahlke et al., 1962). By contrast, a representative who fulfils the role of a delegate representative acts to ensure that his or her decisions and actions as a representative closely correspond to the wishes and preferences of their constituents (Eulau et al., 1959; Rehfeld, 2009; Wahlke et al., 1962). In addition, Eulau, Wahlke and their colleagues also identify a third orientation, the ‘politico’, to describe legislators who adopt aspects of both the trustee and delegate roles, depending on issues and circumstances.

Adapting these two former models, Rehfeld (2005) draws a distinction between ‘pluralist’ and ‘republican’ views of representation. Under the former model, a representative uses his or her own judgment when making decisions and determining the interests of constituents. Meanwhile, a representative operating under the republican model, on the other hand, adheres more closely to what his or her constituents perceive to be in the national interest (Ibid.). Similarly, under the promissory model developed by Mansbridge (2003) representatives pledge or ‘promise’ to carry out and or do what they have been authorised to do by their electors in a manner that is likened to the delegate model.

The idea that elected officials ought to be responsive to and act upon the policy preferences and beliefs of the constituency which has elected them to political office, either in regard to particular policies or on a left/right spectrum, has been the means by which many extant studies of representation have conceptualised representation. Typically, these studies involve examining whether there is an alignment or what has also been referred to as congruence or ‘concurrence’ (Verba & Nie, 1972) between ordinary voters of a given constituency and the legislator whom they have elected (see, e.g., Bafumi & Herron, 2010; Clinton, 2006; Converse & Pierce, 1986; Miller & Stokes, 1963).

In doing so, many studies have often conceptualised representation as ‘dyadic’. According to the dyadic model of representation, constituents are conceived as being substantively represented by the legislator who has been elected to represent their constituency if the legislator has championed the preferences of their constituents. As with the delegate model of representation discussed above, this is a ‘bottom-up’ conceptualisation of representation as the emphasis is on what ordinary voters prefer. The dyadic view differs from the collective model of representation in that it posits that institutions, such as legislatures represent individuals (Ansolabehere & Jones, 2011; Weissberg, 1978). In this instance, representation

41 is defined as having one’s view articulated in the legislature, regardless of which representative(s) articulates this view.

Elsewhere in the literature on representation, the concept of ‘representative claims’ has been discussed and explored, both in normative (de Wilde, 2013; Saward, 2006, 2009, 2010) as well as in empirical texts (Koopmans, 2007; Koopmans & Statham, 1999). Representative claims refer to incidents when individuals ‘claim’ to represent or be a representative of, a defined unit, for example, a geographic constituency, a particular demographic or a country (Saward, 2006, 2009, 2010). This view of representation has been advanced because representation, it is argued, ought to be conceptualised as a dynamic and ongoing process between representatives and those whom they represent rather than a ‘static’ and procedural process, characterised by prevailing in a free and fair election (Saward, 2006, 2009, 2010).

Having now discussed several different theoretical definitions and models of representation, it seems appropriate, when concluding this section, to briefly outline how representation, and more specifically substantive representation, is conceptualised in this dissertation. Overall, it loosely adopts a view of representation that is more closely aligned to the trustee and pluralist models of representation. This is because representation, in the context of this study, is deemed to have taken place when British MPs have highlighted and promoted policies and issues in their parliamentary questions for written answer which are in the interests of I.O. individuals. As has been documented through empirical research, certain policies and issues tend to be more relevant to British immigrant-origin communities owing to disparities between the immigrant-origin and native populations. The ‘interests’ of immigrant-origin individuals are thus ‘determined’ by empirical research, rather than by I.O. individuals themselves. In contrast, the delegate model is less applicable to a study of this kind because it does not examine MPs’ responsiveness to the political opinions, beliefs and preferences of the immigrant-origin population.

Furthermore, as this dissertation does not seek to ascertain immigrant-origin British MPs’ responsiveness to the policy preferences of their I.O. constituents, it does not adhere to the dyadic model of representation. Instead, it adopts a model of representation that is closer to the collective conceptualisation of representation (see, e.g. Weissberg, 1978) as it seeks to examine British I.O. MPs’ responsiveness to the interests of individuals of immigrant-origin throughout the UK, irrespective of where they happen to live. However, the crucial difference in this regard is that this thesis, as noted in the previous paragraph, does not assess MPs’ responsiveness to individuals’ preferences. Therefore, it adheres to a model, which in some respects, resembles the ‘top-down’ responsible party model (see, e.g., Holmberg, 1997).

The aforementioned approach to conceptualising representation found within the representative claims literature has likewise not been adopted in this dissertation. Representative claims are based on the salience of the audience; it is the citizens, not academic observers, who are the ones who determine the legitimacy of representative claims. In other words, a representative’s legitimacy depends on whether their ‘constituency’ (whoever and whatever that may be) perceives that it is represented by the individual making the representative claim (Saward, 2010). In the context of this thesis, this could prove problematic. Firstly, it would be difficult, owing to a lack of available data, to accurately determine whether the ‘audience’, in this case, individuals of immigrant-origin, view each and every individual who claims to represent individuals such as themselves as being ‘legitimate’. Secondly, while empirical tests could be conducted to determine whether the MPs who have made similar claims have substantively represented individuals from an immigrant background we would be unable to conduct similar tests for other immigrant-origin MPs who had made no comparable claim. This would thus hinder attempts to examine the link between descriptive and substantive representation across I.O. MPs more broadly.

At this stage of the dissertation, it should be noted that by defining substantive representation as acting in the interests of immigrant-origin individuals as a collective, as this dissertation does, then something of a ‘representation deficit’ may arise. Within this dissertation, this could ultimately mean that right-wing or conservative interests within immigrant-origin communities are overlooked in favour of left-wing or progressive interests, particularly in relation to policy areas such as the labour market, where the interests of entrepreneurial and business-owning I.O. individuals may differ from others with immigrant roots. Yet, by focusing on a broad range of issues which benefit and appeal to individuals irrespective of their political leanings or personal circumstances, such as improving treatment for cardiovascular disease, curbing criminal activity and reducing levels of unemployment, the potential for such a deficit to occur in this thesis is thus minimised.

Parliamentary Representation and Wider British Society

As noted in the preceding chapter, a legislature that is a microcosm or a condensation of the society that it is has been elected to represent has long been heralded as ideal. Edmund Burke maintained that ‘the virtue, spirit and essence’ of the nation should be present within its national assembly (Pitkin, 1967: 61). Two of United States’ Founding Fathers and earliest presidents, John Adams and James Madison echoed similar sentiments; the former asserted that a representative assembly ‘should be an exact portrait’ of the wider public (Ibid.). It was due precisely to the lack of diversity in the House of Lords that led Sidney and Beatrice

Webb to denounce the upper house as the ‘worst representative assembly ever created, in that it contains absolutely none of the great class of shopkeepers, clerks and teachers; none of half of all the citizens who are of the female sex’ (quoted in Ibid.: 61).

As societies such as the United Kingdom have become more ethnically and racially diverse, there has been greater interest in ensuring that its legislature reflects the ethnic and racial diversity of British society. In contemporary Britain, there are civil society and parliamentary groups which campaign and advocate for a more representative legislature. Part of the work undertaken by Operation Black Vote (OBV), for instance, is centred on ‘lobbying political parties and civic institutions on the benefits of representative bodies’ that are ethnically and racially diverse’. 13 In the Westminster Parliament in November 2008, the Speaker’s Conference on Parliamentary Representation was convened with the aim of examining methods and strategies through which a wider diversity of people could be encouraged and assisted to become MPs and to ‘consider the disparity between the representation of women, ethnic minorities and disabled people in the House of Commons and their representation in the UK population at large’. 14 In addition, the All Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Women in Parliament, while working to improve the representation of women has also underlined its commitment to exploring ways in which Parliament can adapt its practices, procedures and culture in order to retain parliamentarians from other underrepresented groups such as ethnic minorities and people with disabilities. 15

Why descriptive representatives might be more likely to provide substantive representation

Shared Experiences

One of the primary reasons why politically underrepresented groups are thought to be more likely to be substantively represented by legislators with similar traits and or characteristics to themselves is because these legislators will be more sensitive to and have a greater understanding of the concerns and interests of groups whom they descriptively represent. This is due to the fact that they have experience of what it is like to be, for instance, female,

13 https://www.obv.org.uk/what-we-do (accessed 24 October 2018). 14 Speaker’s Conference on Parliamentary Representation https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/other-committees/speakers-conference- on-parliamentary-representation/ (accessed 12 December 2018). 15 Improving Parliament: Creating a Better and More Representative House. All-Party Parliamentary Group for Women in Parliament 2014 Report http://appgimprovingparliamentreport.co.uk/download/APPG-Women-In- Parliament-Report-2014.pdf (accessed 12 December 2018).

44 an ethnic minority or from a working-class background, which, in turn, renders these legislators more predisposed to promoting and advocating on behalf of other women, ethnic minorities and members of the working-class respectively (Mansbridge, 1999: 629). Moreover, a legislator who is, for instance, disabled would thus be considered to be more likely to champion legislation and decisions designed to assist people with a disability. Similarly, a legislator from, for example, a business or military background is deemed to be more inclined to support and promote legislation and measures considered to be in the interests of business or the armed services and military personnel. This argument is linked to the so-called ‘presence model’ outlined by Preuhs (2006) which assumes that shared backgrounds and experiences make descriptive representatives stronger advocates for issues relating to underrepresented groups.

Descriptive representatives’ ability to draw upon these shared experiences is considered vital in representative politics because certain issues which are important and emotive to a particular demographic might otherwise be overlooked or ignored in legislative or policy debates if these representatives are not present within the legislature. Writing from an American perspective, Mansbridge (1999: 647) cites the denunciation of the Confederate flag by a black senator and the delaying of the nomination of a Supreme Court nominee by Congressional women after allegations of harassment surfaced, as examples of this happening in practice. Descriptive representatives can, similarly, use their own experiences and perspectives as members of a particular group to help them to ‘explore the ramifications of newly presented issues’ (Mansbridge, 1999: 644). Moreover, a descriptive representative can, crucially, speak with a higher level of authority during policy deliberations and debates that pertain to those whom they descriptively represent than a non-descriptive representative can owing to the fact that they have experience of life as a ‘member’ of the group which they descriptively represent (Ibid.).

Group Consciousness and Linked Fate

In addition, descriptive representatives are thought to be more likely to substantively represent the interests, preferences and perspectives of those whom they descriptively represent. This is because descriptive representatives are believed to be more inclined to feel that they have a certain responsibility to substantively represent those with whom they share similar traits and characteristics (Mansbridge, 2003). In regard to immigrant and ethnic minority communities, researchers have commonly referred to the apparent ‘responsibility to represent’ others from a similar background as ‘group consciousness’ (see, e.g., Chong & Rogers, 2005; Dawson, 1994; Miller et al., 1981; Sanchez & Masuoka, 2010; Stokes, 2003;

Stokes-Brown, 2006). This is based on the premise that individuals feel a sense of identity, solidarity and attachment towards others who share a common culture, history, heritage, skin colour or religious faith to themselves (Chong & Rogers, 2005; Miller et al., 1981).

The concept of group consciousness is both similar to and connected to another phenomenon known as ‘linked fate’ wherein members of minority and or underrepresented groups perceive that their individual interests are intrinsically aligned with those of the co- members of their group (Dawson, 1994; Gamble, 2007; Tate, 1993, 2003; Whitby, 1997). According to Tate (1993), this stems from a recognition that they are ‘different’ or ‘distinct’ from the majority population, which, in turn, engenders a sense of responsibility and a commitment to the group co-members because the advancement of the group is believed to be simultaneously beneficial to individual members of the group.

In the United States, it has been theorised that African-Americans vote overwhelmingly for the Democratic Party because they are ‘primed’ into voting for what is in the interests of their racial group. The Democrats are considered to be more sympathetic to the ‘agenda' of black Americans and are therefore more likely to advance black interests (Dawson, 1994). To Dawson, a black American's individual interests are intrinsically aligned with those of black Americans in general; in the process, drawing similar conclusions to Butler and Stokes (1974) who emphasised the importance of a ‘collective consciousness’ in explaining working-class loyalty to the British Labour Party in the 1960s and ‘70s.

While it is less clear whether or not immigrant-origin British MPs possess a sense of group consciousness, there is research that indicates that, as later chapters will cover in more detail, group consciousness is apparent among British BAME MPs (McKee, 2017; Nixon, 1998; Sobolewska, McKee & Campbell, 2018). However, whether a sense of group consciousness is present among immigrant-origin white MPs is unclear and may not be as pronounced (Chong & Rogers, 2005).

In closing this section, it is worth noting that while the theoretical concepts of shared experience, group consciousness and linked fate are discussed and explored in this dissertation, none of these concepts are formally operationalised in its later empirical analysis. If I.O. MPs were found to have been more likely to have submitted questions deemed to be in the interests of individuals from an immigrant background then it is queried whether these MPs were, perhaps in part, motivated by a sense of group consciousness or linked fate to do so. However, this is not, throughout this thesis, ever regarded as a wholly reliable indicator or indeed evidence of group consciousness among I.O. MPs. This is because, for reasons discussed later in this chapter, this study does not include a test or

46 tests whereby group consciousness among I.O. MPs can be more accurately assessed and measured.

Surrogate Representation

A further reason why descriptive representatives might be better relied upon to substantively represent underrepresented groups is that descriptive representatives may be more inclined to provide what has been referred to as surrogate representation. This term is used to describe scenarios and incidents when legislators take it upon themselves to represent those with similar demographic characteristics who reside outside of their legislative constituencies (Mansbridge, 1999, 2003). In other literature, ‘collective representation’ (Weissberg, 1978) and ‘institutional representation’ (Jackson & King, 1989) have been used to refer to instances when representatives engage in this form of representation.

Legislators’ willingness to represent those from similar backgrounds who reside outside of their legislative constituencies is linked to the previous discussions on shared experiences and group consciousness. This is insofar as legislators may seek to engage in surrogate representation because they feel a sense of responsibility or ‘kinship' towards others who share their same race, religion, gender, class etc. irrespective of whether they happen to reside within or outside of their legislative constituency (Mansbridge, 2003). This compels these legislators to advance and promote legislation and causes which are designed to assist people with whom they share certain traits and characteristics (Gamble, 2007). Yet, it is important to observe that the theoretical mechanisms outlined immediately above that link descriptive and substantive representation, shared experiences and group consciousness/linked fate, are nonetheless conceptually different from surrogate representation. Rather than being another such mechanism, surrogate representation is a representative activity that could, among others, be triggered by both of these aforementioned mechanisms.

American studies have, as has been documented in the Introduction chapter, highlighted examples of African-American legislators who feel that they represent a wider, ‘national’ constituency consisting of African-Americans residing both inside and outside of their electoral constituencies (Broockman, 2013; Fenno, 2003; Swain, 1993). Sometimes, legislators’ willingness to engage in ‘surrogate’ representation may lead these legislators to become unofficial ‘spokespeople’ for the particular ‘community’ to which they belong. When discussing surrogate representation, Mansbridge (1999, 2003) cites the example of Barney Frank, who as the only openly gay member of the United States Congress became the

‘surrogate’ LGBT representative whom many gay and lesbian Americans throughout the United States have contacted regarding gay rights and discrimination. Frank claims to be willing to hold this unofficial ‘surrogate’ role. He feels a sense of responsibility, as an openly gay member of Congress, to represent these interests and concerns (Mansbridge, 2003: 523). This is supported by Fenno’s (2003) study of black members of Congress in both the late 1970s and late 1990s/early 2000s which found that many of these legislators were likely to report that their constituencies extended beyond their district. These legislators were, in other words, representatives of ‘black America’.

There is empirical research that indicates that descriptive representatives have a greater predisposition to engage in surrogate representation. For example, Broockman (2013) found that black state legislators were, overall, more likely to respond to queries sent by a ‘black’ alias, including those legislators based in different parts of the United States who did not stand to gain electorally by responding to the email. Similarly, in British electoral politics, qualitative research by Nixon (1998) cites examples of ethnic minority British MPs who readily viewed themselves as representatives of a wider community of ethnic minorities. Meanwhile, a 2015 survey of BAME parliamentary candidates observed that many respondents expressed a responsibility towards BAME members of the public, indicating that these candidates’ willingness to do so does not appear to be conditional on where BAME members of the public happen to reside (Sobolewska, McKee & Campbell, 2018).

As outlined earlier in this chapter, this thesis adopts a model of representation which has parallels with the virtual or ‘collective’ conceptualisation of representation (see, e.g, Weissberg, 1978). In doing so, it engages, by default, in an exploration of surrogate representation within the context of British legislative politics in the sense that it examines whether immigrant-origin UK MPs have been responsive to the interests of I.O. individuals, regardless of where they happen to reside in the country. In doing so, it establishes two ‘boundaries’ for the type of surrogate representation it explores. The first is the immigrant- origin status of citizens and residents of the UK by MPs. In other words, the form of surrogate representation employed in this thesis extends to whoever hails from a recent immigrant family background in the wider British population, irrespective of whether or not they share the same ethnic, racial or national background as the I.O. MP or MPs in question. The second, meanwhile, is national, because as I cover in the later Methods chapter, this study is an exploration into the substantive representation of I.O. individuals based within the UK as opposed to in other parts of the world.

Why descriptive representatives might not necessarily be more likely to provide substantive representation

As illustrated in the earlier half of this chapter, there are a number of theoretical arguments that could be made to support the notion that societal groups which have been underrepresented and or marginalised in political decision-making will have their interests best represented by individuals with whom they share similar characteristics.

However, the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation may not be as straightforward as these arguments may assume. While the normative literature that focuses on the political representation of underrepresented groups emphasises the centrality of descriptive representation in ensuring that substantive representation takes place, it also recognises that descriptive representation is not necessarily linked to substantive representation (see, e.g., Dovi, 2002, 2007; Mansbridge, 1999; Phillips, 1995; Williams, 1998). In the latter half of this chapter, some of these arguments, in addition to others which are relevant to the topic of this dissertation, are discussed in more depth.

‘Like’ will not always be best suited to represent ‘like’

Firstly, it is widely acknowledged in this aforementioned literature that a descriptive representative is not automatically qualified to represent individuals whom they descriptively represent given the diversity of opinions, values and life experiences that one will find throughout different underrepresented groups (Dovi, 2002; Pitkin, 1967; Williams, 1998). It is problematic to view any descriptive representative as ‘suitable’ or ‘appropriate’ based on their physical characteristics rather than their values, actions and legislative record. We should not, to paraphrase Dovi (2002), thus automatically assume that any descriptive representative will ‘suffice’. Pitkin (1967: 89) likewise acknowledges some of the possible shortcomings of descriptive representation; in particular, the ‘microcosmic’ view of descriptive representation alluded to earlier. While we could reasonably highlight working- class underrepresentation in a legislature, we would not want to increase the descriptive representation of ‘maleficent’ people, she argues.

On this former point in particular, the literature appears to be in unanimous agreement. It would be inaccurate to view underrepresented groups as a large or a series of smaller homogenous blocs whose interests are intrinsically intertwined. Their interests can often be linked to other characteristics and circumstances such as age, occupation, income and marital status, not to mention a variety of differences when it comes to ambitions, views,

49 experiences and perspectives (see, e.g., Dovi, 2002 & 2007; Phillips, 1995; Swain, 1993)16 Nevertheless, descriptive representatives, should, according to Dovi (2002: 729) ideally hold ‘strong mutual relationships with dispossessed subgroups or historically disadvantaged groups’ while Williams (1998: 34) acknowledges that while the presence of disadvantaged groups does not necessarily result in representation for members of these groups, their presence is usually critical.

In addition, legislators belonging to underrepresented groups might not necessarily serve as ideal descriptive representatives because they might be unrepresentative of the group or groups they descriptively represent. For example, as noted in the Introduction, immigrant- origin British MPs, like the majority of their parliamentary colleagues, are overwhelmingly graduates, sometimes from elite universities, who, prior to entering Parliament worked in professional jobs, namely finance and banking, law and public relations. 17 Moreover, candidates and legislators may also be, in a descriptive sense, unrepresentative of many individuals whom they represent in terms of the values, beliefs and attitudes which they hold. This may be especially apparent among candidates and legislators who belong to a minority group whose members are more socially conservative and religiously observant than the median voter but who are descriptively represented by legislators who are more liberal and secular in their outlook (Dancygier, 2017).

Due to these differences, immigrant-origin candidates and representatives might struggle to relate to people from the same or similar cultural, religious, ethnic or racial background. Consequently, many immigrant-origin MPs and candidates may suffer from an ‘authenticity problem’. In other words, they are perceived to be less ‘legitimate’ owing to the fact that they are unrepresentative of the wider immigrant-origin population and so are consequently less able to substantively represent those individuals who are, for instance, from a lower socioeconomic background or belong to a minority religious faith (Dovi, 2007).

This, in turn, challenges the perception that descriptive representatives can fully relate to minority group citizens and ultimately represent their interests in Parliament. This may lead to minority group individuals feeling patronised by descriptive representatives whom they view as being different from themselves. For example, in 2012, Conservative peer Lord Ashcroft conducted a series of focus groups with ethnic minorities in which many

16 Numerous British aristocratic families, for example, have cross-national ties and in many cases would, therefore, be classified as immigrant-origin according to this thesis. Clearly, their interests diverge dramatically from those of other I.O. families. 17 For more detailed information on the professional backgrounds of BAME MPs who were elected to the House of Commons in 2010, which was something of a breakthrough election for ethnic minority candidates (Heath et al., 2013) see Criddle (2010). Similar data on immigrant-origin white MPs have been taken from the ORA: Pathways project.

50 respondents said that they would regard a black or Asian Conservative candidate as ‘rich and posh’ and so would be unable to relate to their own personal experiences (Ashcroft, 2012: 9). Furthermore, participants of Ashcroft's focus groups took a dim view of parties' promotion of minority parliamentary candidates, accusing the party leadership of engaging in tokenism (Ibid.).

Non-descriptive representatives might be just as willing to represent (and capable of representing) underrepresented groups

Furthermore, it should also be noted that, in some cases, non-descriptive representatives may have demonstrated that they have been more likely to have substantively represented the interests of individuals whom they do not descriptively represent than a descriptive representative might have done.

For instance, native British legislators representing a multicultural constituency might take it upon themselves to improve their understanding of particular events and the effect that these may have on their constituents. Furthermore, non-descriptive representatives may, at times, be among the most vociferous supporters of a particular group and of the causes and issues that pertain to that group. These non-descriptive representatives may, in fact, strongly sympathise or even identify with this particular group. David Amess (Con, Southend West), for example, has worked to highlight anti-Semitism. While British Jews do, as discussed in the previous chapter, constitute an older minority group and so would not be considered as being of ‘immigrant-origin’, Amess, who is not Jewish, and represents a constituency with a negligible Jewish population, 18 can nonetheless be cited as an example of a non-descriptive representative who has represented the interests of a minority demographic group. There are, undoubtedly, plenty of examples of other legislators throughout many different legislatures who have a history of defending and advancing causes that are of interest to groups they do not descriptively represent.

As mentioned earlier in the chapter, while there is broad agreement that descriptive representatives may also be capable of substantively representing the interests of underrepresented groups; normative texts also recognise that non-descriptive representatives may also be capable of substantively representing the interests of underrepresented groups. When doing so, Mansbridge (1999), for instance, cites the

18 Ahead of the 2015 general election, it was estimated, using data from the 2011 Census, that there were 885 Jews of voting age residing in Amess’ constituency of Southend West. In contrast, there were an estimated 20,574 Jews of voting age living in Finchley and Golders Green, the constituency with the largest Jewish population (Boyd, 2015).

51 example of Senator Birch Bayh and other male representatives who were among the staunchest supporters of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) as examples of this happening in practice. As women only constituted a tiny proportion of seats in Congress at the time, Bayh and other male colleagues, by advocating for the adoption of the ERA, became ‘surrogate representatives’ who were acting on behalf of women across the nation. Non- descriptive surrogate representatives can thus be relied upon to ‘step in’ and to take on the responsibility of ensuring that certain interests, in this case, issues and policies pertaining to women, are highlighted, articulated and brought to the attention of other legislative colleagues and policy actors, the media and the wider public.

That being said, entrusting non-descriptive representatives with the role of defending certain interests is not, to some commentators, viewed as ideal (Mansbridge, 1999; Sapiro, 1981). To Sapiro, this is evidenced by the apparent inability of more privileged groups to adequately represent the less privileged. Moreover, when outlining why descriptive representation is important, Mansbridge (1999) cites descriptive representatives’ greater ability to understand and relate to complex problems and issues and, critically, to speak and act with more authority compared to non-descriptive representatives. Descriptive representation is needed, Mansbridge continues, so as to bridge communicative differences between majority and minority groups.

Next, even if non-descriptive representatives may not necessarily be best placed to represent those whom they do not descriptively represent, they may still play an important role in ensuring that underrepresented groups are substantively represented. The literature on women’s representation, for instance, observes that men can serve as ‘critical actors’ on behalf of females. This is because, in the context of female representation, critical actors include not only female legislators who are interested in advancing policy in the interests of females but also male legislative colleagues 19 who share similar aims and objectives vis-à- vis the enacting of ‘female-friendly’ legislation (Annesley, 2010; Annesley & Gains, 2010; Celis, 2008; Childs & Krook, 2006). Annesley (2010: 68) refers to such individuals, both male and female, as ‘strategic actors' and ‘gate openers' who help pave the way for feminist and female-friendly reforms and legislation.

Indeed, there is evidence from empirical literature examining the substantive representation of women which indicates that the interests of underrepresented groups can be promoted and advanced when they are descriptively underrepresented among political officeholders. This suggests that non-descriptive representatives are willing to, and capable of,

19 It should also be noted here that critical actors are not only restricted to legislators; rather, they can take the form of journalists, party members, bureaucrats and figures within the wider feminist movement and other civil society groups (Annesley, 2010; Annesley & Gains, 2010; Celis, 2008; Childs & Krook, 2006).

52 substantively representing underrepresented groups. By way of illustration, gender equality policies have been adopted when women's presence in national Parliaments has been low, sometimes even negligible. Middle Eastern and Latin American countries have, for instance, introduced progressive family law reforms (Htun & Weldon, 2010). Moreover, Latin American countries have been judged to have taken further action to reduce violence against women than Scandinavian countries (Ibid.), which have had among the highest levels of female representation in the world (Wängnerud, 2009). Meanwhile, other countries, such as Jordan and Morocco, have introduced candidate quotas and reserved legislative seats for women (Htun, 2004; Htun & Weldon 2010). In a study of 70 countries spanning four decades, Htun and Weldon (2012) concluded that it was feminist mobilisation in civil society, as opposed to factors such as the descriptive representation of women in government that explains the variation in policy development to combat violence against women between nations.

Levels of group consciousness can vary among individuals

As discussed in the earlier section of this chapter, it has been theorised that individuals who belong to a minority group are more likely to possess a sense of group consciousness. However, levels of group consciousness may, naturally, vary among such individuals. For some, a sense of community or solidarity towards others in possession of the same or similar characteristics or traits to themselves may be strong, while, in the case of some, it may be nearly or entirely non-existent.

For a start, among members of an ethnic or an immigrant community, levels of group consciousness may vary depending on one’s ethnicity. For example, in a society such as the United Kingdom, group consciousness may be stronger among ethnic and religious minorities than among individuals from a white immigrant background. This could be due to two factors; first, higher levels of ‘visibility’ and second, the history of disadvantage and discrimination experienced by individuals of non-white ethnicity. With reference to the first of these, many people from a minority ethnic background are immediately rendered as distinct by way of their physical appearance and, in some cases, by their name and accent. These factors can put these individuals at greater risk of discrimination and of being ‘othered’ by native British society. Furthermore, distinctness by way of physical appearance continues beyond one generation while someone from a white immigrant background, conversely, loses more obvious signs of ‘otherness’ after one generation meaning that they are, at least superficially, no different to members of the indigenous population.

Turning to the second, there has been a greater acceptance of and less opposition towards, white immigrants; specifically, migrants from ‘Anglosphere’ nations such as Canada and Australia, than non-white migrants from the Caribbean and South Asia, as discussed later in Chapter 6. Moreover, public opposition to the settlement and integration of white migrants in the country has not been as apparent as it has been towards non-white migrants (Ford, 2011; Ford, Jennings & Somerville, 2015). This suggests that a ‘hierarchy’ of desirable and less desirable migration is in place (see, e.g. Ford, 2011). On the whole, academic literature has afforded less attention to group consciousness among white immigrant communities in Western societies because researchers have tended to believe that ties to the group do not have a significant influence on behaviour and attitudes beyond the first generation of white immigrant as they have been ‘absorbed’ into the host society (Chong & Rogers, 2005). For these reasons, group consciousness may be stronger among BAME communities which are more distinct by way of their appearance, cultural and or religious background, than less distinct groups, namely, white individuals who come from an immigrant background. If present among these individuals, this may only be present among those of the first generation.

That being said, while group consciousness may be, on the whole, greater among ethnic minorities than among minority white communities, it is possible that consciousness varies between white immigrant communities. Among Anglosphere immigrants and their families, for example, group consciousness may be low or indeed negligible owing to the higher levels of acceptance and the absence of opposition towards Anglosphere migrants. Furthermore, migrants from the Anglosphere share a number of ‘similarities’ to the host UK population; namely, a common culture, language and, in some cases, common ancestry (Browning & Tonra, 2010). This may also contribute to Anglosphere migrants having lower, perhaps negligible levels of group consciousness because these similarities make it easier for them to adapt and assimilate to life in Britain and to be accepted by the native population. In contrast, immigrants from the A8 nations in central and Eastern Europe may have a more keen sense of group consciousness because of opposition towards central and Eastern European migrants has been more apparent (Fox, Morosanu & Szilassy, 2012, 2015; Khattab & Fox, 2016; Rzepnikowska, 2019). Furthermore, as migrants from the A8 are non- native English speakers, this may foster greater feelings of difference from the wider British population.

Moreover, group consciousness can be a more complicated phenomenon. In some cases, individuals may have a stronger attachment to, for example, their ethnic or religious group as opposed to immigrants and or ethnic minorities in general. British Asians, for instance, are said to have more multifaceted identities (ethnic, linguistic and religious) and thus do not

54 subscribe to a pan-Asian identity in the way that black individuals might subscribe to a wider black identity (Statham, 1999).

As in the case of ordinary members of the public, levels of group consciousness among minority and or underrepresented groups will vary among elected officials. It is possible that by occupying a legislative office, a legislator’s sense of responsibility correlates with how well their ‘group’ is descriptively represented among their fellow legislators. Dodson & Carroll (1991), for instance, found that when women account for a smaller proportion of legislative seats, they feel more responsible to represent women; however, as the number of female representatives grows, female legislators become less likely to see themselves as representatives for women. This may indicate that a sense of wider group consciousness or solidarity diminishes as members of a traditionally underrepresented group become more numerous and visible in political office.

Similarly, partisanship and one’s own political leanings or beliefs may likewise shape the extent to which one feels a sense of group consciousness. In the case of minority and or immigrant communities, it has been observed that broadly speaking, figures on the right and left sides of the political spectrum favour fairly distinct and sometimes contrasting approaches to race and ethnicity. Conservatives and those on the right of politics have tended to promote a ‘colour-blind’ approach in which someone's race or ethnic origin is considered to be less of an issue and the focus is instead placed on individuals and the wider society (Kilson, 2014; Ray, 2009; Tran, 2016).

As a result, those on the right are less likely to favour direct action taken by the government to alleviate, eliminate or minimise forms of intolerance. They reject what might be referred to as ‘identity politics’ and instead place an emphasis on viewing people as individuals, irrespective of their ethnic origin or race (Ondaatje, 2011). Furthermore, they simultaneously stress individualism, hard work, self-help, individual choice and personal responsibility (Boff, 2011; Ondaatje, 2011). Political liberals and the centre-left, on the other hand, are more likely to criticise this ‘colour-blind’ approach, claiming that it ignores, or at the very least downplays, undercurrents of racism, discrimination and other disadvantages ethnic and racial minorities might encounter. It is also claimed that this approach does not acknowledge particular privileges which certain members of society possess (Bonilla-Silva, 2006; Brown et al., 2003; A.E. Lewis, 2003; Tran, 2016; Wildman, 1996). These contrasting attitudes may exist among legislatures such as Members of the House of Commons. In the context of this dissertation, immigrant-origin parliamentarians belonging to left-of-centre parties may have higher levels of group consciousness as the left tends to have a more ‘collectivist’ approach to group identity. MPs from right-of-centre parties may, on the other hand, have lower levels of group consciousness due to the right’s more ‘individualistic’ approach.

Despite recognising that levels of group consciousness can vary among individuals, this dissertation does not explicitly address possible variation in levels of group consciousness among British MPs in its empirical analysis. This is because it is not an objective of this thesis to measure and compare levels of group consciousness among immigrant-origin MPs. Rather, as outlined throughout, the objective of this study is to assess the nature of the association between descriptive and substantive representation among individuals from an immigrant background in the UK. It was, therefore, never the intention to empirically examine levels of group consciousness among MPs here.

That being said, when considering how this study could be developed in the future, one suggestion could be to devise a means whereby levels of group consciousness among I.O. MPs could be measured. This could involve observing whether I.O. MPs have made contributions or remarks during, say, parliamentary speeches, that indicate or demonstrate their commitment to or solidarity with people from an immigrant background and then creating an appropriate variable that could be included in the regression models found in later chapters. However, this approach may prove to be problematic owing to MPs’ possible reluctance to being open about such matters as they do not wish to be regarded as representatives of one group as opposed to the whole of society.

When it comes to substantive representation, other factors may be more salient than shared personal traits and characteristics

When determining whether descriptive representatives are indeed more likely to substantively represent the interests of individuals whom they descriptively represent, we should also consider how other factors may have more of a bearing on whether or not and to what extent legislators substantively represent the interests of these groups.

Firstly, it is possible that representatives’ partisanship, rather than their traits and characteristics, may be a more accurate indicator that they are more likely to provide substantive representation. This is because political parties tend to be associated with certain policies (John et al., 2013; Quinn, 2008) and have shown a greater willingness to prioritise, promote and advance particular policies relative to rival parties (Bara, 2006; Bara & Budge, 2001). Although the direction of a party is controlled by a small group of party elites, it is likely that parties’ elected representatives will subscribe to the values and ideological position of the party to which they belong. Furthermore, when it comes to casting legislative votes, legislators in assemblies such as the House of Commons will usually vote along with their party colleagues (Cowley & Stuart, 2012) suggesting that parliamentary

56 parties are more often united than they are divided when it comes to policy that is beneficial to a certain group in society.

By way of illustration, the Labour Party has been the party that has, in a substantive sense, done more to curb ethnic and racial discrimination through government action. Labour governments passed significant pieces of legislation aimed at reducing discrimination, namely, the Race Relations Acts of 1965, 1968 and 1976. The Conservative Party, by contrast, has seldom proposed new anti-discrimination legislation (Wintemute, 2016). As both the promotion and the passage of anti-discrimination legislation are clear examples of legislation that demonstrates substantive representation, we can, therefore, observe that, depending on the issue, underrepresented groups may be more likely to have their interests substantively represented by representatives belonging to a particular party, irrespective of whether or not they are descriptive representatives or not. Consequently, membership of a party may be significant in determining which representatives will offer more in the way of substantive representation to a section of society as opposed to, for instance, their traits and characteristics.

In some cases, there are clear reasons why a party may actively look to cultivate and maintain their support from members of a particular demographic. British ethnic minorities, for instance, have consistently voted, by substantial margins, for the Labour Party (Heath et al., 2013; Saggar, 2000). Therefore, the party leadership and individual Labour MPs may seek to ‘do more’ to represent BAME issues in order to maintain their support among BAME communities. That being said, this might also mean that Labour politicians may, in fact, take these votes for granted and will neglect or even ignore minority concerns and interests (Sobolewska, Fieldhouse & Cutts, 2013).

Similarly, the makeup, composition or ‘profile’ of representatives’ legislative constituencies may likewise determine a legislator’s likelihood of substantively representing the interests of certain groups. For instance, if an MP represents a diverse, multicultural constituency then they might take more steps to substantively represent the interests of people from different cultural, ethnic, racial and religious backgrounds. If an MP represents a constituency containing a significant industry, such as fishing or agriculture, then legislators will be more likely to substantively represent the interests of those working in those sectors.

Empirically, there is evidence that this does go at least some way in guiding legislators’ behaviour. American research from the early 1990s found that Members of the federal House of Representatives will make calculated decisions about how to vote and which issues to promote depending on the ethnic composition of their district (Swain, 1993). Meanwhile, British-based studies find that MPs’ likelihood of tabling questions relating to

57 minorities is determined by the proportion of minority voters residing in their constituency (Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013). Hence, Westminster MPs representing more diverse constituencies may strive to ensure that the interests of different groups are represented, especially if they hold a slender electoral majority in a more marginal seat. By doing so, their chances of being re-election are enhanced because securing an adequate number of votes from different communities could be the difference between re-election and defeat.

Moreover, given the diversity of different interests in any given parliamentary constituency, legislators will often be required to respond to multiple, and sometimes conflicting interests and will make decisions to avoid antagonising certain interests, particularly if the MP is defending a slim majority in a marginal seat. Such MPs may, therefore, endeavour to represent different interests and points of view simultaneously by making careful and calculated decisions about how to best to keep a broad coalition of voters ‘on side’. To return to the earlier example, an MP in a diverse, multicultural constituency may, on one hand, be seen as being ‘responsive' to calls for tighter controls on immigration which may be favoured by many voters. Yet at the same time, he/she may be wary of alienating other voters, such as immigrant-origin voters, if seen to be favouring measures that would penalise migrants by restricting their access to services and for making family reunification more difficult.

Finally, it is possible that MPs’ tendency to substantively represent the interests of certain demographics may also be linked to the personal objectives and goals that they pursue as elected representatives. In Going Home: Black Representatives and Their Constituents Fenno (2003) affirms that all members of the American House of Representatives are ‘goal seekers’ who are motivated to accomplish certain objectives such as getting re-elected, helping to form public policy, accumulating influence in the legislature and assisting constituents and other members of the public with their problems and concerns. Although Fenno’s focus is on members of the American House of Representatives, the notion that legislators are motivated to pursue certain goals while in office can surely also be applied to members of other legislatures. In a study of the British House of Commons, Searing (1985), using interview data with 338 backbench MPs serving during the early 1970s, documents how MPs fulfil certain unofficial ‘roles’ during their time in office, although not simultaneously. The four different roles identified in this research are as follows: ministerial aspirants, policy advocates, Parliament ‘men’ and constituency members.

Of the roles identified by Searing, it is possible to see how, for instance, MPs who could be categorised as policy advocates 20 may exhibit a greater tendency to substantively represent a minority and or underrepresented group if these MPs advocate policies, issues and causes which are in the interests of that group. Luciana Berger (Lab, Liverpool Wavertree) 21 is an example of an MP who could be regarded as a policy advocate who has substantively represented the interests of individuals from an immigrant background owing to her work to raise awareness about mental ill-health. During the 2010-15 Parliament, for example, Berger was among the MPs who tabled the highest number of questions on the subject of mental health. Furthermore, she later served as the Shadow Minister for Mental Health in the subsequent Parliament. In addition, she served as President of the Labour Campaign for Mental Health and as an adviser on mental health to the Liverpool City Region Mayor 22 and has also contributed a series of articles to different media outlets on the subject of mental health policy both during and after her tenure as Shadow Minister. 23

Similarly, Members who could be categorised as ‘constituency members’ because they are primarily committed, as the name suggests, to redressing the grievances and problems raised by their constituents. By doing so, they could likewise demonstrate a greater likelihood of substantively representing the interests of a particular underrepresented demographic if these Members represent parliamentary constituencies in which high numbers of individuals who belong to this demographic reside, regardless of whether or not these Members descriptively represent the demographic.

Chapter Summary

The purpose of this chapter has been to provide a theoretical foundation for this thesis. To achieve this, it has outlined how representation and more importantly political representation have been defined and conceptualised in the existing literature and how representation is conceptualised within this dissertation. In addition, it has provided an overview of theoretical- based arguments that both support and challenge the notion that descriptive representation is linked to substantive representation.

20 Policy advocates, according to Searing (1985), are parliamentarians who are motivated primarily by a desire to affect policy and legislation and gaining influence while carrying out their work as MPs (see also Norton, 1997; Searing, 1994; Saalfeld & Müller, 1997). 21 Labour & Co-operative MP for Liverpool Wavertree from 2010 until 2019. Defected to Change UK – The Independent Group before sitting as an Independent and then as a Liberal Democrat MP. 22 http://www.lucianaberger.com/about-luciana/ (accessed 24 July 2017). 23 http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/author/luciana-berger http://www.independent.co.uk/author/luciana-berger (both accessed 24 July 2017).

The chapter has noted that the view of representation that this study adopts is more closely aligned to the trustee and pluralist models of representation. This is because representation, specifically substantive representation, is, in the context of this study, deemed to have occurred when British MPs have highlighted and promoted policies and issues in their parliamentary questions for written answer which are in the interests of I.O. individuals. The chapter then proceeded to suggest that, in contrast, the delegate and other similar models are less applicable to a study of this kind because it does not examine MPs’ responsiveness to the political opinions, beliefs and preferences of the immigrant-origin population.

To summarise, the theoretical-based arguments concerning substantive representation as identified in this chapter are empathy for co-members of the group because of shared experience. In addition, group consciousness and linked fate, wherein group members show solidarity and attachment to one another and individual group interests are intertwined. Finally surrogate representation, in which legislators seek to represent the interests of individuals whom they descriptively represent, both those residing inside and outside of their legislative constituency.

Meanwhile, the theoretical-based arguments that challenge the notion that characteristics and traits as discussed in this chapter are as follows. First, personal traits and characteristics such as ethnicity, gender or occupation may not be the most reliable indicators that a legislator or aspiring legislator will substantively represent the interests of those whom they descriptively represent. Additionally, non-descriptive representatives might be willing to and be capable of substantively representing those whom they do not descriptively represent. Thirdly, partisanship and ideology may influence how likely legislators are to provide substantive representation. Lastly, legislators, irrespective of the traits and characteristics which they possess, are perhaps more inclined to be guided by the nature and diversity of their constituencies.

Later chapters will refer to some of this chapter’s content when empirically examining the extent to which immigrant-origin MPs who served during the 2010-15 Parliament substantively represented the interests of the immigrant-origin population.

Chapter 3. An Overview and Discussion of the Methods Used in This Study

As has already been discussed in the preceding chapters, this dissertation empirically tests whether the immigrant-origin population of the United Kingdom has been more likely to have been substantively represented by MPs who also come from an immigrant background. Thus far, the methods employed in this dissertation to investigate this have only been summarised and have yet to be covered in great detail. The purpose of this chapter is, therefore, to provide an in-depth and comprehensive description of and the justification for the methods it employs.

Studies exploring the nature of the relationship between the descriptive and substantive representation of minority and or underrepresented groups have employed different methods in order to quantify substantive representation. These include examining the way in which legislators voted on particular matters that are in the interests of the group(s) under investigation, for example, civil rights and black Americans (Bullock & MacManus, 1981; Swain, 1993; Whitby, 1997), by analysing parliamentary speeches (Celis, 2006) or by examining parliamentary questions submitted by legislators to government ministers (Martin, 2011; Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013).

This dissertation, as mentioned throughout earlier chapters, uses parliamentary questions for written answer to explore the nature of this relationship in regard to I.O. individuals. More specifically, it adopts, as its primary form of analysis, an approach used by Saalfeld (2011) and Saalfeld & Bischof (2013) to quantify substantive representation. Namely, it determines how likely MPs were to have tabled questions that were in the interests of individuals of immigrant-origin through the use of a range of search terms and negative binomial regression. To supplement the regression analysis, this study, in addition, uses a device from the field of corpus linguistics known as collocation to explore the words and language employed by MPs in their parliamentary questions when referring to matters that are in the interests of individuals from an immigrant background.

The chapter begins by outlining why this study uses parliamentary questions for written answer and why parliamentary questions are a useful instrument by which to study substantive representation in legislatures such as the UK House of Commons. It then provides further background information on parliamentary questions in British politics and presents data pertaining to their usage during the 2010-15 Parliament.

The latter part of the chapter, meanwhile, is devoted to outlining the methods used in this dissertation. It examines, in greater detail, the aforementioned ‘search term’ approach used to identify questions and the criteria that was then, in turn, employed to determine whether or not these questions were deemed to demonstrate that the MP who had tabled the question had substantively represented the issue which he or she was addressing in the question. To help illustrate further how these criteria were established and to provide examples of some of the different types of questions that were submitted by MPs, a series of sample questions have also been included in this section of the chapter. Lastly, it discusses how collocation is used in this study, the modelling strategy that is employed in later chapters and the main hypotheses that these later chapters will test.

Parliamentary Questions for Written Answer

Despite adhering to different forms of procedure, all democratically elected national parliaments grant their members opportunities to submit questions to members of the executive which the government has to answer (Russo & Wiberg, 2010; Saalfeld, 2011; Wiberg, 1995). In both the United Kingdom and in other democracies, these questions serve a number of purposes including, for instance, the opportunity to extract information from the executive or to call upon it to take action on a particular issue or cause (Hansard, 2010; Russo & Wiberg, 2010).

In the UK House of Commons, there are four different types of question that Members can submit (or ‘table’) to government ministers. These include questions for oral answer and questions for written answer. The latter type of question, as noted above, is used in this dissertation. In contrast to questions for oral answer which are tabled inside of the parliamentary chamber, questions for written answer must either be handed in at the Table Office or electronically from MPs’ parliamentary offices. If the MP is in a more remote location, this can be done using the e-tabling system via the parliamentary intranet (Hansard, 2010). Members are required to draft their questions as concisely as possible and must conform to parliamentary conventions by using language that is respectful towards to Members of both Houses of Parliament, the judiciary and the Crown (Ibid.). When drafting questions, Members must also ensure that their questions relate to a matter for which the Minister who is being addressed is responsible. Finally, questions must seek information or call upon ministers to act (Ibid.). By way of illustration, an example of a ‘typical’ parliamentary question for written answer is the following question from Conservative MP Tracey Crouch:

‘To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) What estimate he has made of the number of people aged over 65 who suffer from extreme loneliness; (2) what plans the government has taken to tackle loneliness among older generations’.

– Tracey Crouch (Con, Chatham & Aylesford) 21/10/2012.

Often, MPs will use parliamentary questions as a means to communicate or ‘signal’ to their constituents and other members of the public to inform them about the work they are undertaking in Parliament. Hence, questions are often used to gain information about a particular issue and or to draw ministers’ attention to matters concerning their constituents and their constituencies (Franklin & Norton, 1993; Martin, 2011; Russo & Wiberg, 2010). Often, MPs will publish the questions they submit on their parliamentary websites along with the response that they receive from the Minister to whom the question was directed (Geese, Goldbach & Saalfeld, 2016). The following question has been included to illustrate how an MP makes reference to their constituency within a question for written answer:

‘To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what proportion of housing benefit claimants in Islwyn constituency are in active employment’.

- Chris Evans (Lab, Islwyn) 21/10/2012.

Unlike oral questions which are both tabled and answered within the House of Commons chamber, the government will, after receiving questions for written answer, publish their written responses to each question it receives in due course. However, the time taken for it to respond in kind varies depending on the type of written question that has been submitted. Questions originally tabled for oral answer which failed to be answered during the Question Time with the relevant Minister or Secretary of State must receive a written answer on the day of the oral session whereas ‘Named Day’ questions, however, must be answered on the date specified by the MP who has tabled the question (Hansard, 2010). In contrast, so-called ‘ordinary’ written questions do not have to be answered by a specific date and there is little that MPs can do when there are delays to their questions being answered except to submit further or follow-up questions (Ibid.). Once answers have been drafted, they are sent directly to the MP who asked the question. Like oral answers, the texts of the written answers are recorded in Hansard, although in a separate section (Hansard, 2010).

Recent decades have witnessed a marked increase in the use of the questions procedure in the British House of Commons. In the session that immediately preceded the start of the

2010-15 Parliament (namely, the 2009-10 session) 25, 467 questions for written answer were published in the Order Paper (Hansard, 2010). During the 2010-15 Parliament, a total of 191,553 questions were submitted by MPs. As these figures suggest, parliamentary questions for written answer are a popular device among some Members of Parliament although their usage varies between MPs. For instance, Priti Patel (Con, Witham) tabled 2,182 questions whereas Dennis Skinner (Lab, Bolsover) tabled just two. Furthermore, certain MPs, most notably ministers, do not submit parliamentary questions because they themselves form part of the government. Meanwhile, the Speaker and Deputy Speakers of the House of Commons likewise do not table questions because it is their role to chair parliamentary debates and to remain politically neutral.

Given the accountability function of parliamentary questions and the fact that the Labour Party formed the official Opposition during the 2010-15 Parliament, it is unsurprising that, as Figure 3.1 shows, Labour MPs tabled considerably more questions than MPs belonging to other parties. In addition, a number of MPs from the Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties served as government ministers during this Parliament. Ministers, as mentioned above, do not table parliamentary questions, meaning that fewer questions would have originated from MPs belonging to these parties. Similarly, a study of different European countries found that centre-left parties tabled more questions than parties on the political right in each of the countries (France, Germany, Netherlands, Greece, UK and Spain) that featured in the study (Hänni, 2016). However, with the exception of Greece, the centre-left formed the official Opposition in each of the aforementioned countries, thus demonstrating how parliamentary questions are often used, both in the UK and elsewhere, as a means to monitor the current government and its record.

Figure 3. 1. Number of parliamentary questions for written answer tabled by party

Labour Conservative Liberal Democrat Scottish National Party DUP

Green

Party Plaid Cymru Independent SDLP Alliance UKIP Respect

0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000 120,000 No. of Questions

N = 191,553.

Why use parliamentary questions for written answer when studying substantive representation?

In the context of British electoral politics, parliamentary questions have been a common instrument by which to study the substantive representation of underrepresented groups (see, e.g., Kolpinskaya, 2017; Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013; Saalfeld & Kyriakopoulou, 2011). As highlighted in both these texts and in other literature, there are many advantages for adopting this approach in a study exploring the relationship between the descriptive and substantive representation of immigrant-origin individuals.

To begin with, extant research indicates that parliamentary questions have been useful for the study of other politically underrepresented groups such as women and ethnic minorities as they present opportunities for MPs from underrepresented groups to raise issues of concern for group co-members without potentially jeopardising their parliamentary careers (Kolpinskaya, 2017). Secondly, centralised party control over parliamentary questions is relatively low, thus granting individual MPs greater flexibility to highlight and to promote issues which are of personal interest to themselves (Kolpinskaya, 2017; Martin, 2011).

Moreover, and importantly for a study into the descriptive and substantive representation of immigrant-origin groups, these questions have been, at least traditionally, more likely to reflect MPs’ individual identities, such as their religious background (Franklin & Norton, 1993; Wiberg, 1995).

In the United States, researchers have traditionally tended to examine the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation through the use of roll call votes cast by Members of Congress or by Members of state legislatures (Bullock & MacManus, 1981; Miller & Stokes, 1963; Swain, 1993; Whitby, 1997). This approach, however, is less suited to legislatures such as the UK House of Commons where party discipline is more tightly enforced; consequently, MPs will usually vote the way that they are instructed to do so by their party leadership. However, as noted by Cowley & Stuart (2012), incidents of dissent have increased in recent decades in Westminster politics. Moreover, parliamentary voting records provide only a narrow insight into how MPs have represented certain demographic groups such as immigrant communities as they only reveal the way in which MPs voted, or abstained. As a result, voting records lack nuance and so do not offer a detailed view of an individual MP’s policy agenda(s), legislative interests or political beliefs (Martin, 2011).

There are further advantages for using parliamentary questions for written answer as a means to explore the extent to which UK Members of Parliament have substantively represented a particular demographic group in relation to certain issues. Firstly, they are easily accessible. An archive of parliamentary questions can be accessed through sources such as the official Parliament website 24 and the parliamentary monitoring website TheyWorkforYou. 25 Both of these sources obtain their information from Hansard, the edited verbatim report of parliamentary proceedings. 26 In addition, each question will have a uniform opening which makes it clear as to whom the question is directed. This opening is then followed by making reference to the relevant Department, such as Transport or Work and Pensions: ‘To ask the Minister/Secretary of State’.

Finally, the standard length of questions for written answer presents two further advantages. Firstly, these questions are often more substantial than questions for oral answer as parliamentary procedure enables Members to ask ‘a composite, complex question with no limit on the data required’ (Hansard, 2010: 4). In contrast, an oral question must be a single question that does not require a lengthy answer. This prevents MPs from requesting, for example, a vast quantity of data on a particular subject from the Minister in receipt of the

24 http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-questions- answers/ (accessed 20 July 2017). 25 https://www.theyworkforyou.com/about/ (accessed 6 September 2018). 26 http://hansard.parliament.uk/ (accessed 24 August 2017).

66 question (Ibid.). Thus, MPs can submit more detailed questions comprising of multiple parts. Yet at the same time, Members tend to keep their questions for written answer relatively short and, because of this, many of these questions will generally address only a single point or issue. This makes it quicker and easier for the researcher(s) to ascertain the genesis of a singular or set of written questions. Therefore, unlike oral questions, questions for written answer have the advantage of allowing MPs to address more than one point in a question. At the same time, these questions are usually concise and relatively short in length, which makes it easier to ascertain the motivation behind each MP’s decision to submit the question.

Where were parliamentary questions for written answer directed?

Although parliamentary questions for written answer are generally directed at government ministers, Members also have the opportunity to submit questions to a variety of individuals who are not serving as ministers. Over the course of the 2010-15 Parliament, Members submitted questions to a total of thirty different departments, organisations, bodies and individuals. Among these were eighteen Government Departments such as the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Culture, Media and Sport. Other questions were also directed at organisations or bodies such as the Public Accounts Committee and the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA). However, as Figure 3.2 shows, questions were overwhelmingly directed to government departments; in particular, larger departments such as Health and Work and Pensions. Meanwhile, the Departments of Northern Ireland, Wales and International Development received comparatively few questions. By contrast, non- departmental bodies receive proportionally very low numbers of questions. Consequently, their data have been excluded from the following graph (Figure 3.2).

Figure 3. 2. Number of parliamentary questions for written answer received government department

Health Work & Pensions Business, Innovation & Skills Home Department Defence Exchequer

Transport

Education Justice Foreign & Commonwealth

Communities & Local Government Department Environment, Food & Rural Affairs Energy & Climate Change Culture, Media & Sport International Development Northern Ireland Scotland Wales 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 No. of Questions

N = 191,553

As it is often assumed that the association between descriptive and substantive representation in relation to minority groups is positive, we might, therefore, expect to find that MPs from a migrant background directed a proportionally larger number of questions towards departments and other areas of government which tend to handle matters pertaining to the interests of immigrant-origin individuals, for example, the Home Office and the Departments for Work and Pensions and Justice. If so, we could say that this serves as an early, albeit tentative indicator that I.O. MPs were more inclined to substantively represent the interests of I.O. members of the public.

The following graph (Figure 3.3) shows how questions tabled by both native and immigrant- origin MPs were distributed among government departments. It illustrates that while many departments received approximately similar proportions of questions from both native and immigrant-origin Members, the latter group of MPs tabled proportionally more questions to the Justice, Defence, Business Departments and the Home Office. By contrast, MPs who did not come from an immigrant background submitted proportionally more questions to the Departments for Work and Pensions and Transport. While the fact that MPs from an immigrant background submitted proportionally more questions to the Home Office and

Justice Department may be a vague indicator that I.O. MPs may have demonstrated a greater likelihood of providing substantive representation, there is, however, little that can be gained by way of precise assessments from these data alone, especially when we consider that the interests of I.O. individuals extend beyond issues and matters that generally concern the Home Office and Justice Department.

Figure 3. 3. Distribution of parliamentary questions for written answer received by government department, Native & I.O. MPs

Health Work & Pensions Home Office Business, Innovation & Skills Transport Exchequer

Education

Foreign & Commonwealth Defence Justice Native Energy & Climate Change Department Immigrant-Origin Environment, Food & Rural Affairs Communities & Local Government Culture, Media & Sport International Development Northern Ireland Scotland Wales 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Distribution of Parliamentary Questions (%)

N = 191,553 27

The Questions Used

This dissertation uses all parliamentary questions for written answer tabled by UK MPs during the 2010-15 Parliament (N = 191,553). These questions were extracted from the website TheyWorkforYou 28 as part of the aforementioned Open Research Area (ORA) project Pathways, a pan-European study investigating the representation of immigrant-origin

27 As was the case in Figure. 3.2, the data for minor bodies and organisations have been excluded. 28 https://www.theyworkforyou.com/written-answers-and-statements/ (accessed 13 November 2018).

69 individuals in eight European democracies. The text of all of these questions was entered into an Excel spreadsheet along with the following information: the name of the MP who submitted each question, the date on which the question was tabled and the individual to whom the question was directed.

The Search Term Method

Due to the large number of questions that were tabled by MPs during the 2010-15 Parliament, it would have been a laborious and time consuming process to read through all of these questions to discover which demonstrated evidence of substantive representation in relation to at least one of the policy areas which this dissertation has used to explore the substantive representation of I.O. members of the public. Therefore, it was necessary to develop a strategy whereby questions that could potentially pertain to I.O. individuals could be more easily identified. To achieve this, this dissertation employs a ‘search term’ approach used, as mentioned towards the start of this chapter, by Saalfeld (2011) and also by Saalfeld & Bischof (2013).

This approach involved creating at least one search term ‘dictionary’ for each of the policy areas used in this thesis to investigate the substantive representation of immigrant-origin individuals. Each of these dictionaries consists of an extensive list of related words and phrases that are associated with the relevant policy area; by doing so, it was hoped that search term searches would locate the widest possible range of questions that pertain to each policy area. For example, as the tables found in Appendix II shows, the crime search term dictionary contains words and phrases such as ‘victim’ and ‘have been shot’ whereas words such as ‘depression’ and ‘psychiatric’ can be found in the mental health search term dictionary. All of the search term dictionaries used in this dissertation can be found in Appendix II.

As can be observed in these Appendix II tables, some of the search terms found within these dictionaries have been shortened. This was done to streamline this whole process by reducing the number of searches that had to be undertaken and also to eliminate unnecessary words from the search term dictionaries. For example, ‘racis’ is present in the Prejudice and Discrimination search term dictionary because questions containing both ‘racism’ and ‘racist’ will be located when applying this search term. Similarly, by using ‘self- employ’ as a search term, it is possible to locate all mentions of ‘self-employed’ and ‘self- employment’ within the body of questions. In other instances, words appear in one form, such as convict, as this search term will return both ‘convicted’ and also ‘convicts’.

Aside from the search term method described here, further tools of quantitative text analysis could have been employed in this dissertation. These could have included, for example, a lexical-based methods approach to sentiment analysis, whereby a text or group of texts are searched using a predefined list of words which are associated with a specific sentiment (Gonçalves et al., 2013). However, this may not be particularly useful in the context of this thesis as the objective of this study is not to ascertain sentiment but rather to determine whether the MP has, by tabling the question, demonstrated substantive representation. Additionally, while it might be easier to assemble a dictionary of words that indicate positive and negative sentiment for a book or film review, it would be more problematic to do so when looking for a demonstration of substantive representation in texts such as parliamentary questions because it would be harder to identify words associated with substantive representation than it would be for words associated with common sentiments, such as positivity and negativity.

Furthermore, parliamentary questions, as the examples included in this chapter document, typically follow a formulaic and rigid structure. Consequently, MPs tend to be less expressive in the questions they submit than they might otherwise be when delivering speeches. Therefore, sentiment analysis may be more appropriate for analysis of parliamentary speeches than for parliamentary questions.

Coding the Questions

The questions that were identified using searches were then carefully read so that the motivation behind each of these questions could be deduced. Sometimes, further research was necessary to try and ascertain the rationale or motivation behind the question, if, for example, a question cited a piece of government legislation. If the question was judged to be sufficiently relevant to the issue, the question was coded as ‘1’ while all other questions were left as ‘0’. This process was repeated in each of the following ‘policy area’ chapters using the relevant search term dictionary. Given the fact that a number of the search terms can appear in a variety of different contexts, additional precaution was taken to ensure that each question identified by using the search terms was coded accordingly.

Next, the total number of questions that were tabled by each MP addressing each of the policy areas used in this thesis to examine the substantive representation of I.O. individuals was then entered into a second dataset, alongside a number of different independent and control variables, to form a series of count dependent variables.

How Questions Were Coded: Coding Criteria

This section of the chapter details and discusses the different ‘criteria’ that was used to assess whether or not questions that were identified using search term searches demonstrated sufficient evidence of substantive representation. It does this in two stages: the first outlines the types of questions that have been deemed to show evidence of substantive representation and were coded accordingly. Meanwhile, the second outlines the types of questions which were not considered to be clear demonstrations of substantive representation and therefore were not coded as such.

Each criterion used is accompanied by at least one sample question identified during search term searches. It is important to point out that in order for a question to be considered to have demonstrated substantive representation; it only had to fulfil one of the following eight criteria listed in this initial subsection. Likewise, a question would not be considered as demonstrating substantive representation if it exhibited at least one of the three criteria listed later in the subsequent subsection. Additionally, there was some flexibility in these coding criteria. Rather, these served as more of a general guide as opposed to a rigid list as certain questions did not fit neatly into one of the following categories.

Types of questions that were considered to demonstrate substantive representation

i. Questions that relate directly or specifically to immigrant-origin individuals or communities

The first group of questions which demonstrate substantive representation were those questions that made a clear, direct or explicit reference to individuals from an immigrant background. An example of which comes from Labour MP Luciana Berger as seen below. As the text of her question shows, it makes clear reference to the black and ethnic minority community:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps his department is taking to tackle inequalities in mental health services in the black and minority ethnic community.

- Luciana Berger (Lab, Liverpool Wavertree) 25/11/2014

The following questions from Keith Vaz and Stephen Timms are similar to the one from Berger; however, they refer to two specific immigrant-origin groups, the South Asian community and black males respectively:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what steps he is taking to tackle preventable diseases in South Asian communities;(2) what steps he is taking to provide information on diabetes to South Asian communities.

- Keith Vaz (Lab, Leicester East) 15/5/2011

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what assessment he has made of the reasons for the high level of unemployment among young black men; and what steps he proposes to take to tackle this problem.

- Stephen Timms (Lab, East Ham) 11/07/2012

In some cases, a question may refer directly to citizens and residents of immigrant-origin but this may not be immediately clear from its text. In the following example, the MP asks about the Care2Work programme, an EU project aimed at helping individuals from a minority ethnic background access employment.

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what the outcomes are of the care2work programme to date; how the outcomes are measured; how many people that programme has supported; and how many such people are in work since receiving help.

- Margot James (Con, Stourbridge) 11/01/2014

Finally, in lengthier questions, such as the one below tabled by Sadiq Khan, the MP may make more than one point or request and the reference to immigrant-origin individuals/communities may not be immediately conspicuous within the text of the question. Crucially, these questions do, at some point, address an immigrant-origin community directly. Consequently, questions such as these were deemed to have evidenced substantive representation and were coded accordingly. In the case of Khan’s question, the clear reference to immigrant-origin individuals comes in the second part of the question:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many (a) self-inflicted, (b) non self- inflicted, (c) other non-natural causes, (d) restraint, (e) homicide, (f) awaiting classification deaths there were in (i) adult male prisons, (ii) adult female prisons, (iii) youth male prisons and (iv) youth female prisons in each year since 2010;(2) how many deaths in custody in (a) 2010, (b) 2011, (c) 2012 and (d) 2013 were prisoners of black, Asian and minority ethnic origin.

- Sadiq Khan (Lab, Tooting) 11/3/2014

ii. Questions that appeal for data or statistics on a certain issue

As noted earlier in the chapter, the British parliamentary procedure requires that questions appeal for information and or press the executive for action (Hansard, 2010; Norton, 1993). These requests for further information have come in different forms. The first and possibly most straightforward question tabled by Members of Parliament is a request for some basic information or statistics about a specific issue. As can be observed in the example questions presented below, these questions appeal to the Minister to provide a figure or statistic on a particular matter, often at or during a specific moment, or, as in the case of the third example, specific points in time, such as individual years:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many crimes involving (a) knives and (b) firearms were recorded in each postcode area in each London local authority in 2009-10.

- Karen Buck (Lab, Westminster North) 11/10/2010.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many hate crimes have been reported in Plymouth in the last 12 months.

- Oliver Colvile (Con, Plymouth Sutton & Devonport) 21/11/2012.

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office how many people died as a result of diabetes in (a) 2008 and (b) 2013.

- Gregory Campbell (DUP, East Londonderry) 21/3/2014.

When deciding on the coding criteria to be employed in this dissertation, it was queried whether questions such as those listed above, represented too much of a ‘low-cost’ activity and should not, therefore, be considered as evidence of substantive representation.

That being said, tabling parliamentary questions are, in and of themselves, low-cost activities for Members; they can quickly and easily be drafted and submitted to ministers with relative ease. Moreover, it was observed that when Members appealed to ministers for basic information, namely in the way of statistics, they would often submit subsequent ‘follow up’ questions requesting further and more detailed information relating to their original question. For these reasons, it was, therefore, decided that questions appealing for basic information, such as those quoted above submitted by parliamentarians Buck, Colvile and Campbell, demonstrated sufficient evidence of substantive representation.

iii. Questions that ask for data on trends

Similarly, another type of question commonly asked by MPs that was judged to have demonstrated substantive representation were questions which ask for the trends that have occurred in regard to a particular issue over a certain period of time, as opposed to a specific moment in time. For instance, Members may wish to learn more about trends in burglary offences, as the question below illustrates:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment she has made of recent trends in the level of burglary offences in (a) Gloucestershire and (b) England and Wales; and if she will make a statement.

- Lawrence Robertson (Con, Tewkesbury) 25/4/2011

These questions were thought to have shown evidence of substantive representation because they can serve as a means to monitor government performance. If, for example, trends are in a negative direction then it may suggest that action taken by the government has failed the people concerned. This may also indicate that actions and decisions taken by the government have exacerbated the problem(s). By enquiring about trends, MPs are able to hold the executive to account on various issues. This, in turn, demonstrates substantive representation on the part of the MPs who submit these kinds of questions. An example of this kind of question is the following from the Member of Clwyd South:

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what assessment he has made of recent trends in female employment in (a) Clwyd South constituency, (b) Wales and (c) the UK

- Susan Elan Jones (Lab, Clwyd South) 11/5/2013.

iv. Questions requesting information on the action or measures the government are taking on ‘X’ …

In addition to requesting basic information or clarity on an issue, MPs will often submit questions with the intention of discovering what action or measures the government are taking to address a particular issue or problem. Questions such as these were thus interpreted as evidence of substantive representation because the MP is looking to gain additional information on a certain policy proposal or legislation that may be of relevance to immigrant-origin members of the public. Examples of this type of question are as follows:

To ask the Minister for Women and Equalities what steps she is taking to tackle hate crime.

- Jon Ashworth (Lab, Leicester South) 18/11/2011.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much her Department spent on measures to reduce numbers of burglaries in each of the last two years, and; what plans she has for such spending in each of the next three years.

- Steve McCabe (Lab, Birmingham Selly Oak) 21/5/2012.

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what steps he is taking to help unemployed people over the age of 64 years in (a) Paisley and Renfrewshire North constituency, (b) Scotland and (c) the UK return to work.

- Jim Sheridan (Lab, Paisley & Renfrewshire North) 11/06/2013.

v. Questions that request information on the impact or effect that a policy or programme etc. has had on ‘X’…

The fifth type of question which this study has denoted as showing evidence of substantive representation are those in which Members wish to know details of the impact or effect that a

76 particular policy, programme or legislation had, or has had, either in a broader or more specific sense. Questions of this nature have been regarded as evidence of substantive representation because the MPs who table them are seeking to educate themselves on the effect of a policy or programme and or to highlight what they might regard as poor government management of a particular issue or service. A relevant and common example of this type of question are those in which the MP seeks to know what effect the government’s economic policies have had on a region or sector of the economy:

To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what assessment she has made of the effect of the UK government's economic policies on youth unemployment in Northern Ireland.

- Vernon Coaker (Lab, Gedling) 11/9/2012

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent assessment she has made of the effect of reduced street lighting on (a) levels and (b) fear of crime in England and Wales.

- Iain Wright (Lab, Hartlepool) 9/2/2012

vi. Questions that seek to discover or receive clarification on whether the government will take, or has taken action on a particular issue or cause

Similarly, questions in which the MP is enquiring as to whether the government has or will take action on matters that are in the interests of individuals of immigrant-origin have been interpreted and duly coded as evidence of substantive representation. Often, the MP submitting these questions will request that the Minister reveals what steps have been taken or what steps will be taken on the particular issue(s).

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has to prevent people from developing mental health problems.

- Jo Swinson (Lib Dem, East Dunbartonshire) 6/7/2010

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will take steps to increase his department's assistance for British citizens whose first language is not English to find employment.

- Nicky Morgan (Con, Loughborough) 21/07/2010

To ask the Secretary of State for Education whether he plans to renew government funding for security at Jewish faith schools after 2015; and if he will make a statement.

- Matthew Offord (Con, Hendon) 11/03/2014

vii. Questions that appeal for an assessment or evaluation of how effective government action or intervention has been at solving, reducing or alleviating a certain matter

Questions which ask for an assessment or evaluation of how effective government action or intervention has been at solving, reducing or alleviating a problem or issue on a subject relating to one of the policy areas featured in this study were also deemed to be examples of MPs providing substantive representation. The following are examples of this type of question.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate he has made of the effect, in cash terms, on (a) the budget for mental health services and (b) funding for mental health research, including joint work between his department and the university sector of his department's planned spending reductions; and if he will make a statement.

- David Blunkett (Lab, Sheffield Brightside & Hillsborough) 9/6/2010

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the future jobs fund in helping the unemployed into work.

- Kevin Brennan (Lab, Cardiff West) 11/06/2010

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what (a) grants and (b) other financial support his department makes available to start-up businesses in areas of high unemployment.

- David Morris (Con, Morecambe and Lunesdale) 21/10/2010

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what recent assessment he has made of the achievements of the cross-government working group to tackle anti-Semitism; and if he will make a statement.

- David Amess (Con, Southend West) 4/3/2011

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent assessment she has made on the impact of deploying officers on single police patrol on levels of (a) violent knife crime, (b) anti-social behaviour and (c) gun crime.

- Dan Jarvis (Lab, Barnsley Central) 16/7/2011

To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will take steps to review the effectiveness of his policy on tackling obesity in England.

- Andrew Rosindell (Con, Romford) 21/1/2014.

viii. Questions that enquire about government action that safeguards people from potential harm or danger

The final group of questions that this study has interpreted as demonstrating substantive representation are questions in which the MP tabling the question wishes to know more about what the government is doing to keep people safe from threats to their health or wellbeing. The following question is an example of this.

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he is taking to improve the quality and effectiveness of NHS smoking cessation services.

- Seema Malhotra (Lab, Feltham & Heston) 1/09/2012

The following question requests an assessment on the threat of far-right radicalisation and is considered as evidence of substantive representation because immigrant-origin individuals are likely to be potential victims of this kind of extremism.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what recent assessment she has made of the threat of far-right radicalisation.

- Greg Mulholland (Lib Dem, Leeds North West) 19/01/2015

Types of questions that were not considered to demonstrate substantive representation

Many questions that were located through the search term searches were not, however, considered to demonstrate evidence of substantive representation. This subsection discusses and describes these questions as well as providing some examples.

i. Questions that relate to citizens and residents of a country different to the UK

The first of these types of questions are questions pertain to individuals residing in different parts of the world. These questions were not regarded as evidence of substantive representation for the simple reason that this study is focused specifically on the substantive representation of immigrant-origin individuals residing in the UK and not equivalent minority groups in other nation-states. An example of which includes alleged racism and homophobia in the political party of another country, in this case, the Polish Law and Justice Party:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to the answer of 18 October 2010, Official Report, columns 495-96W, on Poland: political parties, if he will publish the advice he received on the position on homophobia and racism of the Law and Justice Party in Poland.

- Andrew Griffiths (Con, Burton) 21/10/2010

Likewise, questions such as the one below that was tabled by Adrian Sanders, were not coded as evidence of substantive representation because it concerns the diagnosis and treatment of diabetes in the developing world, thus precluding the UK:

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps he is taking to promote improved diagnosis and treatment of diabetes in developing countries.

- Adrian Sanders (Lib Dem, Torbay) 16/7/2011

Questions with a broader global focus, however, proved to be more difficult when deciding how they should be coded. Given their global focus, questions such as these could apply just as much to the UK as to the rest of the world. However, given their international

80 dimension, such as the question from Matthew Offord included below, questions with this kind of international focus have not been considered because the focus of this study is specifically on immigrant-origin citizens and residents of the United Kingdom and anywhere beyond the UK would be too broad.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what his policy is on UK representation at the proposed UN Conference on Anti-Racism planned for 2011.

- Matthew Offord (Con, Hendon) 23/1/2011

ii. Questions which are vague and or have an ambiguous intent or purpose

In addition, questions that were not thought to constitute substantive representation were questions which were vague and or where the intent or purpose of the question was ambiguous. This can be illustrated using the following two examples below, which are questions relating to gun licensing. In both, it is unclear whether the motivation behind these MPs’ decisions to submit these two questions. However, it is not clear whether they are doing so because they are concerned about gun violence and public safety or whether they are, for example, interested in the revenue generated by gun licensing. As there was some ambiguity in the substance of these two questions, neither were deemed to have demonstrated substantive representation and neither were coded in this manner.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent representations he has made to the Secretary of State for the Home Department on charges for firearm licences.

- Julian Huppert (Lib Dem, Cambridge) 11/2/2014

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when she plans to bring forward proposals for reform of the firearms licensing fees system.

- Diana Johnson (Lab, Kingston upon Hull North) 2/7/2014

iii. Questions that inquire as to the financial cost

Finally, questions which inquired as to the financial cost of, for example, a scheme, programme or service were not judged to have demonstrated substantive representation as it was often unclear from the text of questions where the main priority of the Member submitting the question lay. To some MPs, their motivation behind tabling such a question may be because they are concerned about the cost to the taxpayer as opposed to the service(s) directly involved. To illustrate this, the following question from Charlie Elphicke MP has been included. He appeals to the Secretary of State about the cost to the Exchequer and to individuals as a result of lost earnings and youth unemployment. However, the way in which the question is structured suggests that his primary concern is not about levels of youth unemployment but the cost to the Exchequer and the country as a whole. In this case, and in other similar questions, it was decided that the question did not contain sufficient evidence of substantive representation and so it was not coded as thus.

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what recent estimate he has made of the total cost to (a) the Exchequer and (b) individuals caused by lost earnings and youth unemployment in (i) each year between 2005 and 2010 and (ii) each region.

- Charlie Elphicke (Con, Dover) 01/12/2013

In closing this section, it is important to acknowledge two particular points. First, the process by which someone decides what constitutes substantive representation is a subjective one. Therefore, it is quite possible that someone else conducting this research may have different views on what constitutes substantive representation.

In addition, it should also be noted that these coding criteria outlined above are by no means entirely comprehensive; there are other types of questions which do not fall neatly into one of the above categories. In these cases, using additional personal judgment was necessary when deciding whether or not the question sufficiently demonstrated substantive representation.

Exploring the Types of Words and Language Used by MPs in Parliamentary Questions

As mentioned earlier, this thesis uses negative binomial regression analysis to examine MPs’ likelihood of submitting questions relating to the interests of immigrant-origin individuals. While this method is useful, by focusing on this method in isolation our attention is focused on the motivation and rationale behind the tabling of these questions. As a result, we overlook the actual content of the questions; specifically, the types of words and language that are employed by immigrant-origin MPs in their questions.

Therefore, this thesis also explores the words and language used by immigrant-origin MPs in their questions for written answer relating to I.O. issues as a means to examine how the language employed differs from that used by native MPs, if at all. To explore the language that is used in parliamentary questions, this dissertation uses collocation, a device that is used in the field of corpus linguistics to establish which words appear in close proximity to a particular word within a body of text. The words which appear close to the search or ‘node’ words are referred to as collocates. These help to provide an indication of the context(s) in which the search word appears in the text under analysis (Baker, 2006). All of the collocates that appear in later chapters of this dissertation have been established using the online software SketchEngine. 29 The collocates that appear in subsequent chapters are listed in tables in descending order according to their mutual information score, which is a measure of how strongly each is associated with the search word(s) (Baker, Hardie & McEnery, 2006).

To prepare the questions for the software analysis, a series of individual corpora were created. Firstly, all of the questions tabled by immigrant-origin MPs during the 2010-15 Parliament were copied from an Excel spreadsheet containing all questions for written answer tabled during the Parliament and then entered into a .txt file as one continuous body of text. As questions for written answer are prefaced, as mentioned earlier, by near-identical openings (i.e. ‘To ask the Secretary of State’ ...), all question openings were hence excluded as they offered no value or relevance to the analysis. Identical steps were then taken to create a separate corpus of questions put forward by native British MPs. To explore the content of questions more thoroughly and to examine MPs from different backgrounds more closely, additional corpora were created consisting of questions tabled by white British, white immigrant-origin and BAME MPs respectively, again using the same process as outlined above.

Each of these corpora was then uploaded separately to SketchEngine and analysed using several different search words associated with the policy areas that this dissertation uses to

29 https://the.sketchengine.co.uk/login/ (accessed 24 August 2018).

83 investigate the substantive representation of I.O. individuals. SketchEngine allows users to select a range from which collocates are drawn; for example, five or ten words to the left and right every time the search word appears in the text. A collocate range of five words on each side of the search word was adopted for the purposes of this study. Given the brevity of many questions, it was considered important to select a narrower collocate range so as not to include a larger collection of words which may be less relevant to the analysis. To illustrate how this process works, the following table (Table 3.1) has been included below. This shows a partial concordance for ‘cardiovascular disease’ in questions tabled by immigrant-origin MPs as a means by which to demonstrate where ‘cardiovascular disease’ is situated in questions submitted by these MPs using the collocate range mentioned above.

Instead of dividing the original corpus, an alternative approach would have been to use classifiers to estimate the differences between different groups of MPs within this corpus. To achieve this, it would have been necessary to categorise questions depending on whether MPs who had tabled the questions were from an immigrant background or not in addition to the ethnic backgrounds (white British, white I.O., BAME) to which they belonged.

However, it was deemed to be unnecessary to do this as it was quicker and easier to divide the questions based on MPs’ aforementioned characteristics using the Filter function found in Excel. Moreover, as the collocate range was set, as noted already, to five words before and after the node word, words in the question tabled by an MP either immediately before or after the questions containing the node word might, therefore, be included in the collocate range. By splitting the corpus in the ways outlined above, this particular concern would thus be avoided.

Table 3. 1. Concordance for cardiovascular disease in questions tabled by I.O. MPs plans to revise guidelines on cardiovascular disease and its risk factors as part of the management of nhs reforms. and social isolation on cardiovascular disease , (ii) cancer and (iii) mental recovery rates from (i) health , (ii) in cumbria. what steps he is cardiovascular disease in men is diagnosed as early taking to ensure as possible;(2)

the development of the cardiovascular disease outcomes framework for ; and if he will make a statement. what steps his

. what assessment he has cardiovascular disease made of levels of (a) , (b) cancer, (c) chronic lung diseases and (d)

on their ability to fight (a) cardiovascular disease . whether his department infectious and (b) measures optimism in of patients to fight (a) cardiovascular disease . what his priorities are in infectious and (b) respect of

for people with (a) atrial cardiovascular disease ; and if he will make a fibrillation and (b) statement;(3) what

Although collocation can serve as a useful method to ascertain how particular words are situated within a body of text, it can give an incomplete and, at times, a misleading depiction of the context in which words appear in a corpus.

This can, for instance, occur when minimal levels of co-occurrence are set using software such as SketchEngine to remove words which appear infrequently in the corpus from the list of collocates in order to exclude so-called colligations from collocate lists. Colligations are words which can often receive high mutual information scores because they appear only a few times in the text and typically immediately precede or follow the node word on the few occasions that they appear in the text (Baker, Hardie & McEnery, 2006). Examples of colligations include numbers or letters, for example when an MP is listing several points in a question, or prepositions, articles and conjunctions such as ‘of’, ‘an’, ‘to’, ‘the’, or ‘and’. As a consequence, certain words which ‘co-occurred’ strongly with the search word and which were perhaps relevant to the analysis may have, in some cases, been excluded in the

85 collocate lists found in later chapters. It should thus be pointed out that the setting of minimal levels of co-occurrence is at the discretion of the individual(s) conducting the research.

To try and reduce the probability of excluding potentially meaningful words from the lists of collocates, searches of each corpus were conducted several times using each of the designated search words. When a search word was used for the first time, a low level of co- occurrence was set. This was then repeated several times; each time, the level of minimum co-occurrence was gradually increased. This process was then repeated for each of the search words used in this study. By doing this, the risk of potentially excluding relevant words from the lists of collocates found in Chapters 5-8 was minimised.

When analysing a body of text, researchers may opt to remove stop words from the corpus or corpora being analysed (see, e.g., El-Khair, 2006). These are words which, rather like colligations, are common words bearing no significant meaning; instead, they simply serve a grammatical and or syntactical function (El-Khair, 2006; Wilbur & Sirotkin, 1992). Yet in this dissertation, no action was taken to exclude stop words when assembling the later collocate lists unless, as discussed above, they were colligations. This is because collocation is concerned with words that appear in a defined range either side of a search word. Consequently, it was not necessary to ensure that other stop words apart from colligations were omitted from the collocate lists.

Finally, as outlined previously, this thesis does not formerly operationalise theoretical concepts such as group consciousness in its later empirical analysis. That said, there are a number of expressions, words or phrases which could be used to explore the plausibility of theoretical claims covered in this thesis, for example using collocation to assess group consciousness. As discussed in the Theory chapter, this could include language which indicates or demonstrates the presence of a degree of group consciousness among I.O. MPs in the questions they submit, such as those relating to their ancestral homeland(s), race or ethnicity. One way of doing this could be to use a series of node words which pertain exclusively to immigrant-origin individuals, community or communities, such as ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘immigrant’ when gathering collocates. However, a problem that could arise here is that when MPs table questions for written answer, they do not tend to make reference to their own family background, race or ethnicity in their questions. As a result, it could be more difficult to accurately deduce whether or not these MPs possess a degree of group consciousness from the words found to co-occur strongly with these node words.

Modelling Strategy

This penultimate section of the chapter details the modelling strategy that is employed in this thesis. Namely, it outlines and describes the main independent and control variables used in Chapters 5-8. Further details on these independent variables and the full set of independent and control variables used in the later regression analyses are included in Table 3.2. Details on variables that are specific to certain chapters can be found in the chapters themselves.

Main Independent Variables

As this study is primarily concerned with the descriptive and substantive representation of immigrant-origin citizens, the primary independent variable it uses is a dichotomous variable that separates immigrant-origin MPs (coded as ‘1’) from native British MPs (coded as ‘0’). Meanwhile, a second dummy variable separates MPs depending on whether they are from a BAME group (‘1’) or not (‘0’). The third of these variables is a binary Labour MP variable. This variable was included in regression models in three of the four policy area chapters when it was assumed that being a Labour MP would have had a positive effect on submitting questions on matters that are in the interests of I.O. individuals.

A fourth independent variable was introduced to ascertain the extent to which Members were guided by constituency demography to table questions relating to the interests of immigrant- origin individuals. Using data from the most recent national Census conducted in 2011, each MP was coded with the percentage of foreign-born and BAME individuals residing in their constituency respectively. It is possible that an MP and their staff may use the proportion of foreign-born residents as a proxy when determining the interests of their constituents. This, in turn, may affect the nature of the questions that they put to the executive. It was similarly anticipated that MPs may also use the ethnic composition of their constituencies as a similar proxy. Therefore, a further continuous variable was created which assigned to each MP the percentage of ethnic minority residents residing in their constituency at the time of the 2011 Census. However, as levels of foreign-born residents and levels of BAME residents were found to correlate very strongly, it was unnecessary to include both variables in the later regression models. Consequently, either one of these variables was used in the later models; when appearing, it does so under the label Constituency Cosmopolitanism. In Table 3.2 below, the data for foreign-born residents by constituency has been included alongside Constituency Cosmopolitanism.

Next, the variable Marginality is included in a number of the later regression models. Electorally vulnerable MPs who were elected with small majorities may also feel an added impetus to table more questions addressing a broad range of policies and issues than those elected to serve electorally safe seats. This is because they stand a larger chance of being defeated in the next general election and so wish to communicate to their constituents that they are working hard on their behalf and that they deserve to be returned to Westminster at the following general election. In contrast, an MP who has been elected to represent a safe parliament seat where the risk of defeat in a forthcoming election is minimal may be, on the other hand, less active when it comes to tabling parliamentary questions because their chances of re-election to the Commons are more assured. Hence, the Marginality variable coded each MP’s majority as a percentage they secured during their most recent electoral contest. 30 Once again, statistics pertaining to this variable can be found below in Table 3.2.

Meanwhile, a further set of explanatory variables collectively referred to throughout the thesis as Relevant Experience/Knowledge, records pre-parliamentary experience, expertise or knowledge which MPs may possess as a result of their previous occupation, their membership of a particular committee or an all-party parliamentary group (APPG) which is relevant to the specific policy area that the chapter addresses. This set of variables have been incorporated because MPs may have taken a greater interest in these policy areas than other MPs owing to their occupational background and or because of the experience and or knowledge they have acquired as a member of a relevant committee and or APPG. As Relevant Experience/Knowledge consists of four sets of descriptive statistics (one for each policy area) these are presented in the relevant policy area chapter rather than in Table 3.2. 31

Finally, the variable Number of Years as an MP was originally included in regression models used throughout the four later policy area chapters so as to ascertain whether the length of time an MP had been in the Commons prior to the 2010-15 Parliament had an effect on whether they were more or less likely to table questions relating to the interests of immigrant-origin individuals. It was reasoned that a less experienced Member who was, for

30 For most MPs, this was the 2010 general election which occurred not long before the 2010-15 Parliament first convened. MPs who entered the Commons during the 2010-15 Parliament as a result of winning a by- election contest were assigned the electoral majority (as a percentage) they received in the by-election. 31 Data used here are derived from the Pathways dataset of UK MPs from the 2010-15 Parliament. Specifically, data gathered by Pathways pertaining to MPs’ prior occupation, the committee which they were a member of for the longest and the APPG(s) of which they were members. first convened. MPs who entered the Commons during the 2010-15 Parliament as a result of winning a by-election contest were assigned the electoral majority (as a percentage) they received in the by-election. 31 Data used here are derived from the Pathways dataset of UK MPs from the 2010-15 Parliament. Specifically, data gathered by Pathways pertaining to MPs’ prior occupation, the committee which they were a member of for the longest and the APPG(s) of which they were members.

88 instance, first elected in 2010 or in the previous general election in 2005 and who is looking to enhance his or her reputation may have felt more inclined to table parliamentary questions on a range of different topics on a more frequent basis than their more experienced parliamentary colleagues. They may do this as a means to build and establish their reputation, both to parliamentary party colleagues and to the wider public. However, as this particular variable was found to have had neither a positive nor an inverse effect in any of the models in which it was initially included, it was subsequently omitted from the analysis. A number of statistics relating to this variable have nonetheless been included in Table 3.2.

Main Control Variables

In each of the four policy area chapters that follow, three control variables are included in the regression models that appear in these chapters. The first of these control variables is referred to as Ministerial Service. This controls for the amount of time, in months, that each MP served as a government minister or in a Speakership role during the 2010-15 Parliament. It was essential to include a control of this nature because members of the government, in addition to the Speaker of the House and the Deputy Speakers do not table parliamentary questions. Each MP was, therefore, coded depending on how many full months they held ministerial office during the aforementioned Parliament.

Meanwhile, the Service as MP in 2010-15 Parliament variable registers the service of each MP during the Parliament in months. While most MPs served for the entire duration of the almost five-year Parliament (i.e. 60 months) a minority of MPs, however, did not serve throughout the entirety of the Parliament, either due to death or resignation whereas another group of MPs did not serve for a full term because they entered the Commons via a by- election as replacements for these outgoing MPs. A final control variable introduced tallies of the number of questions submitted by each MP that did not relate to the dependent variables. This was because certain Members were found to be enthusiastic users of parliamentary questions, while others made use of this device much more sparingly. Further details on the dependent and explanatory variables used in this thesis can be found in each of the four policy area chapters (Chapters 5-8) while further details on the control variables discussed in this section can be found in Table 3.2 below.

Table 3. 2. Independent & Control Variables (Descriptive Statistics) Variable N Mean Standard Minimum Maximum Deviation

Immigrant-origin 669 0.11 0.32 0 1 MP (dummy)

BAME MP 669 0.04 0.20 0 1 (dummy)

Labour MP 669 0.41 0.49 0 1 (dummy)

Constituency 669 11.76 11.25 2 59.3 Cosmopolitanism

Marginality 669 18.66 12.44 0 59.7

No. of years as an 669 8.41 9.22 0 49 MP

Ministerial Service 669 8.41 17.63 0 59 (months)

Service as MP in 669 58.23 7.88 5 60 2010-15 Parliament (months) Source: Author’s own.

Main Hypotheses

The following four policy area chapters adopt three broadly similar hypotheses. This section outlines these hypotheses. Other hypotheses adopted in later chapters are outlined and detailed in the ‘Hypotheses’ sections of the chapters that follow.

H1: Immigrant-origin MPs will have been more likely than native British MPs to have substantively represented the interests of immigrant-origin individuals by submitting more parliamentary questions for written answer relating to the four policy areas.

H2: BAME parliamentarians will have been more likely to have substantively represented the interests of immigrant-origin individuals by submitting more questions relating issues that were in the interests of I.O. individuals than their white parliamentary colleagues.

H3: Local factors will have played a part in inducing MPs to substantively represent these interests. Hence, parliamentarians representing constituencies where there are indicators that either demonstrate or indicate higher levels of ill-health, higher rates of criminal activity and higher levels of unemployment, for example, will have been more likely to have substantively represented the interests of immigrant-origin individuals. Conversely, MPs representing constituencies where these issues are less apparent will have demonstrated a lower likelihood of substantively representing these issues.

Summary

This chapter has sought to provide a comprehensive overview of the methods that are employed in later chapters of this dissertation to determine whether or not and the extent to which immigrant-origin MPs substantively represented the interests of immigrant-origin individuals in relation to several different policy areas.

It has first outlined why questions for written answer are used to explore this relationship as opposed to other forms of parliamentary activities in this thesis. It does so for several reasons; firstly, questions for written answer provide more nuanced insight into the interests and agendas of Members of the House of Commons than voting records or oral questions. In the case of the latter, MPs can only table a question that addresses a single point, whereas when submitting questions for written answer, MPs are able to submit a question consisting of more than one point. However, there are drawbacks to using questions for written answer when studying the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation. These questions are typically short in length and so often do not provide much context from which an assessment can be made as to whether the question sufficiently demonstrates substantive representation. Hence, due to their length, the motivation behind the MP’s decision to submit certain questions is not always clear from reading the text of the question alone.

Next, the chapter has outlined the coding criteria used to determine which questions located in search term searches did and did not demonstrate evidence of substantive representation along with questions that were tabled by MPs during the 2010-15 Parliament to better illustrate how these coding criteria were established.

Towards the end of the chapter, collocation, a device used in the field of corpus linguistics and employed in this study to explore the types of words and language used by MPs in their parliamentary questions was discussed. Collocation complements the regression analysis

91 that is likewise employed in later chapters because by using this device it is possible to discover more about the words and language that make up parliamentary questions.

Finally, this chapter detailed the modelling strategy that is employed in Chapters 5-8 by covering the main independent and control variables and the main hypotheses that these chapters adopt.

Chapter 4. Determining the Interests of the UK’s Immigrant-Origin Population

Identifying and determining the interests of immigrant-origin individuals in the UK is important in a study of this kind. Often, the first step taken in research that explores the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation among minority and or underrepresented groups is to demonstrate ways in which the group that is being studied is distinct and different from a more politically advantaged group in terms of their overall policy preferences and or the social and structural inequalities that they face (Celis, 2008; Htun & Weldon, 2010; Kolpinskaya, 2017; Phillips, 1998; Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013; Swain, 1993; Tate, 2003; Whitby, 1997). By first illustrating ways in which particular groups are distinct, researchers are then able to identify and determine what the interests of a particular group are and how their interests may or may not differ from the politically advantaged group(s).

After doing this, researchers are then able to take steps towards ascertaining whether or not and the extent to which descriptive representatives have been more likely than non- descriptive representatives to have substantively represented the interests of individuals whom they descriptively resemble. This is not, of course, to say that other sections of society do not benefit from having these interests promoted and represented by elected legislators. Nor is it the case that these interests will apply equally and uniformly to each individual who is a member of a particular societal or demographic group. Rather, it is acknowledging that certain policies and issues largely affect, or are more likely to pertain to certain groups; thus, actions taken by elected representatives to address these issues are more relevant to these groups than they are to others.

The objectives of this chapter are twofold: first; to outline, in greater detail, two different approaches that could be taken to identify the interests of underrepresented and or minority groups. Second, to detail how this thesis has gone about determining the interests of immigrant-origin individuals and to illustrate, through the use of secondary data sources, where the interests of the I.O. individuals lie in relation to the policy areas that are employed in this thesis to examine the substantive representation of I.O. individuals.

The structure of this chapter is as follows: it commences by querying whether there is evidence that immigrant-origin individuals have broadly speaking, subscribed to a set of political priorities, opinions and attitudes that differ from those held by the indigenous

93 population by discussing and drawing upon literature that has explored the concept of an ‘ethnic agenda’. It then proceeds to illustrate how an approach that relies on opinion polling data may not be the most useful method when ascertaining the interests of immigrant-origin individuals due to the similarities and convergence between white Britons and ethnic minorities in relation to different issues that have been observed in the literature.

Latterly, as the objective mentioned previously has stated, the chapter fulfils the second objective by investigating and illustrating how the interests of I.O. individuals differ from those of the native British population in relation to the aforementioned different policy areas that are employed in this thesis to examine the substantive representation of I.O. individuals.

Do Immigrant-Origin Individuals have an ‘Agenda’?

One approach that could be taken to determine the interests of a politically underrepresented group is by looking for evidence that people who belong to the group in question subscribe to an ‘agenda’.

In the extant literature, discussions on the existence of a group ‘agenda’ have centred on ethnic minorities; however, the concept can nonetheless be applied to other underrepresented groups when opinion polling data is used to ascertain the interests of the group which is being studied. Broadly speaking, an ‘ethnic agenda’ is typically understood to refer to a set of political priorities, objectives and attitudes that are broadly shared by individuals from a minority ethnic background (Fitzgerald, 1987). More specifically, it has been used by researchers seeking to ascertain if British ethnic minorities have exhibited differences from white people in terms of their political priorities, objectives, beliefs and attitudes (Dancygier & Saunders, 2006; Fitzgerald, 1987; Heath et al., 2013; Saggar, 2000; Sobolewska, 2005; Studlar, 1986).

However, it is important to note that when the term ‘ethnic agenda’ has been used, it has always been used as a very loose term. This is because one can, naturally, identify differences, both between and within different minority ethnic groups on a diverse range of issues and topics such as asylum policy, the War in Afghanistan and attitudes to policing and law and order among others (Fitzgerald, 1987; Heath et al., 2013). In addition, some issues relate to a specific ethnic or religious minority group and do not attract attention from other minority groups, such as Sikh campaigns for the right to wear turbans (Heath et al., 2013). Rather, ‘ethnic agenda’ is used to describe broad, consensual goals that are shared by people who identify as belonging to a particular ethnic group.

Theoretical and empirical research into forms of ‘group consciousness’, a concept which was introduced earlier in Chapter 2, also reinforces the claim that ethnic minorities share an agenda that is separate from that which is held by the majority white population. In the United States, for instance, Dawson (1994: 113) attributes the high levels of support for the Democratic Party among African-Americans to a perception that the party’s platform is more closely aligned to the African-American ‘agenda’. Other studies conclude that immigrants’ policy preferences are influenced by their status as a member of a minority group (Cain, Kiewiet & Uhlaner, 1991; Wolfinger, 1965). This is based on the notion that minority group membership can condition its members into thinking of what is best for the group when assessing the merits and demerits of party platforms or various policies (Dawson, 1994). Other scholars have reached similar conclusions about other demographic groups such as white British working-class voters in the 1960s and 70s (Butler & Stokes, 1974). In summary, the perceived interests of the wider group override individual preferences when the interests of the individual run counter to group interests (Bergh & Bjorklund, 2011).

To determine what the ethnic agenda looks like, researchers have sought to identify the priorities of ethnic minorities by referring to survey questions which ask respondents to select what they feel to be the most salient issue(s) facing Britain. This research has found that issues which tend to be more race-specific, such as immigration and mother-tongue teaching, have not been prioritised to the same extent as unemployment, education and health (Fitzgerald, 1987; Saggar, 2000; Sobolewska, 2005). Moreover, it has been widely documented that both white Britons and ethnic minorities share similar attitudes and opinions on a variety of policy issues. It could, therefore, be concluded that, as a group, ethnic minorities do not subscribe to an ‘agenda’ that is markedly different from the white population (Dancygier & Saunders, 2006; Fitzgerald, 1987; Heath et al., 2013; Saggar, 2000; Studlar, 1986).

It has been suggested that although ethnic minorities express similar attitudes and preferences to those shared by white people, ethnic minorities have different perspectives on policy issues that survey questions have failed to identify. For instance, the higher proportion of ethnic minorities who cite unemployment as the most salient issue facing the country may hold this view due to perceptions that they face greater levels of discrimination in the labour market (Fitzgerald, 1987; Heath et al., 2013; Sobolewska, 2005).

Similarly, while claiming that there is little evidence to suggest that ethnic minorities subscribe to an agenda that is distinct from individuals of white ethnicity, Saggar (2000: 29) argues that ethnic minorities do not have different priorities to the larger white community. He theorises that ethnic minorities do, however, adhere to a separate ‘race agenda’ in the sense that they follow a ‘separate and discrete’ collection of issues based on a belief that

95 racial discrimination and exclusion remain widespread in British society. It has been noted that in earlier surveys that issues which have little or no direct effect on minorities, such as devolution, Northern Ireland, defence and international affairs were viewed as less salient by ethnic minorities (Layton-Henry, 1990; Sobolewska, 2005; Studlar, 1986). This supports the argument made by Saggar regarding minorities’ ‘discrete’ agenda. In other words, the views of ethnic minorities are shaped by how policies may impact on them personally, which causes them to prioritise those issues. As policies relating to issues such as Northern Ireland, devolution and defence do not directly affect ethnic minorities, they are regarded as less important by BAME citizens.

Ethnic minorities’ attachment to the Labour Party provides an additional indicator of the existence of an ethnic agenda. Despite sharing many similar attitudes with their white counterparts, ethnic minorities are known to have consistently identified with, and voted for, the Labour Party in significantly high numbers (Heath et al., 2013; Saggar, 2000). The levels of support that Labour receives from the BAME electorate have exceeded the support that the party has received from another traditional Labour constituency, the white working-class. A collection of studies has concluded that differences between white people and ethnic minorities cannot be attributed to class and residential location (see, e.g., Ashcroft, 2012; Crewe, 1983; Heath et al., 1991; Saggar, 2000) although research by Sanders et al. (2014) has found that occupational class has a greater effect on the voting behaviour of ethnic minorities compared to white people. Further evidence of ethnic minorities’ attachment to the Labour Party is demonstrated by the fact that individuals of non-white ethnicity are considerably more inclined to believe that Labour is the party most likely to ‘improve opportunities for minorities’ (Heath et al., 2013: 91).

As introduced earlier, one of the main aims of this chapter is to illustrate and establish how and where the interests of immigrant-origin individuals differ from the native British across several different policy areas. These policy areas will be used later in the thesis to examine the extent to which immigrant-origin MPs have substantively represented these interests through parliamentary questions for written answer. In doing so, it disaggregates both white individuals from an immigrant background and ethnic minorities in order to investigate how and where the interests of these two broad immigrant-origin groups differ and are similar.

When studying the interests of individuals of immigrant-origin, there are numerous policy areas and issues upon which a study of substantive representation can be based. As mentioned earlier in the thesis, the policy areas used in this analysis have been selected because existing research has highlighted clear differences between the native British population and British citizens and residents who are of immigrant-origin in areas such as health, (un)employment, crime and discrimination. To assess substantive representation,

96 this thesis has opted, as highlighted in the Introduction chapter, to focus on where there are the documented disadvantages and disparities between the native and immigrant populations as opposed to using public opinion data.

This section has highlighted that relying on public opinion data to determine the interests of an underrepresented group such as the UK’s wider immigrant-origin population can be problematic as it is likely, that the interests and attitudes of both native and immigrant-origin individuals do differ significantly, as this section has indicated. As discussed later in the chapter, by ‘assigning’ interests to I.O. individuals based on disparities observed in empirical research and in secondary data, it is possible to develop more detailed assessments of whether or not, and the extent to which MPs have substantively represented the interests of the immigrant-origin population.

Assigning of Interests

A review of the relevant literature finds that when researchers have sought to determine whether legislators have represented the interests of a particular demographic group, they have often done so by identifying issues that pertain predominantly, or in some cases exclusively, to the group in question. Rather than using opinion poll data to identify the interests of a group, their interests are instead ‘assigned’ to the group by these researchers. For example, when determining the interests of BAME and other visible minorities, matters relating to racial and ethnic diversity and immigration to the UK have been deemed to be among the interests of individuals from these backgrounds (Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013). Meanwhile, Kolpinskaya (2017) uses measures taken to address anti- Semitism and Islamophobia as being in the interests of adherents of these minority faiths. For American researchers investigating the interests of black Americans, matters relating to civil rights legislation have been deemed to be in the interests of black Americans (Gamble, 2007; Swain, 1993; Whitby, 1997).

This approach has also been omnipresent in the literature on women’s representation, in which action taken by legislators to prosecute perpetrators of sexual assault, to ensure access to abortion and to either uphold or to advocate for entitlement to paid maternity leave are regarded as being in the interests of women. Legislation in these areas can help shape female access to education and employment, their ability to care for their families and the opportunity to enjoy good health and to alleviate the effects of possible financial hardship or even poverty (Htun & Weldon, 2010). Other researchers adopt a similar approach to

97 identifying women’s interests. These include measures to combat violence against women and to ensure or broaden access to childcare (Celis, 2008).

How Interests are Determined in this Thesis

When determining the interests of immigrant-origin individuals, this thesis has broadly adhered to what it refers to as the documented disparities model. Under this model, interests are assigned to immigrant-origin individuals when it has been observed, in empirical research, that there are disparities between natives and individuals from an immigrant background in regard to certain policy areas.

In doing so, it adopts a similar approach to that adopted by Phillips (1998) and Tate (2003) who regard measures to assist individuals in lower-paid and part-time employment as being in women's interests because females tend to be overrepresented in both lower-paid and part-time work.

For instance, immigrant-origin British citizens and residents, in relation to health, have been at a greater risk of developing certain physical and mental health conditions than members of the native British population (see, e.g., Abbotts, Harding & Cruickshank, 2004; Karlsen & Nazroo, 2009; Weich et al., 2004). Consequently, preventative measures to halt the development of these conditions and to alleviate the symptoms of those already afflicted are in the interests of people who come from an immigrant background. Similarly, the documented disparities model has been employed in the later Prejudice and Discrimination chapter because extant research highlights how individuals from non-British backgrounds face discrimination and prejudice (Currie, 2007; Heath & Cheung, 2007; Khattab & Fox, 2016; Rzepnikowska, 2019). As a result, efforts made by MPs to reduce and or highlight discrimination and other forms of prejudice are in the interests of the I.O. population.

Likewise, this model has also been applied to crime and the criminal justice system in this thesis because individuals from an immigrant background are at a greater risk of various types of criminal activity (Corcoran, Lader & Smith, 2015; Jansson, 2006; Parmar, 2014; Phillips & Bowling, 2017; Rossetti, Dinisman & Maroz, 2016; Salisbury & Upson, 2004). Moreover, I.O. individuals, especially those from a minority ethnic background, have also expressed more pronounced anxieties and concerns about becoming victims of crime (Phillips & Bowling, 2017; Salisbury & Upson, 2004). Furthermore, there is research suggesting that there are disparities in the ways in which people from immigrant backgrounds are treated by the police and the criminal justice system (James, 2006; Newburn, Shiner & Hayman, 2004; Parmar, 2014; Phillips & Bowling, 2017; Waddington,

Stenson & Don, 2004). Therefore, actions and measures to reduce crime and to highlight possible unfairness in the ways in which police and other authorities interact with the public are in the interests of I.O. individuals.

Finally, this same model was used in the later Labour Market chapter because of the higher levels of unemployment that have been observed among immigrant communities in relation to the native population (see, e.g., Berthoud, 2000; Currie, 2007; Heath & Cheung, 2007; Khattab & Fox, 2016). Therefore, steps taken to reduce unemployment and to help people to enter the employment are likewise in the interests of I.O. individuals. In addition, action and measures taken by legislators to assist individuals who work part-time and who are self- employed are considered to be in the interests of I.O. individuals owing to the fact that people from an immigrant background are more likely to be in these types of employment (Clark & Drinkwater, 2007; Nazroo & Kapadia, 2013b).

The remaining part of this chapter, as explained above, illustrates how the interests of immigrant-origin individuals differ from the native UK population in relation to these aforementioned policy areas. It introduces the data that has been used to explore these differences in addition to presenting these data visually.

The Data Used in this Chapter

The data used in this chapter have been drawn from three sources: the 2010-11 Home Office Citizenship Survey (HOCS), the 2010 Labour Force Survey (LFS) and the 2010 Ethnic Minority British Election Survey (EMBES). This subsection of the chapter provides some background information on these surveys and explains why they are being used to explore the interests of immigrant-origin individuals. In the subsequent subsection, I outline the adjustments that have been made to the original datasets and the reasons for making these adjustments.

The Citizenship Survey, which is sometimes referred to as the Communities Study, ran from 2001 until 2011 and was conducted on a biennial basis, initially by the Home Office and later by the Department of Communities and Local Government. It predominantly covered issues relating to ‘community cohesion, civic engagement, race, faith and volunteering’ and has been used by ‘government departments and external stakeholders to help inform their work around the issues covered in the survey’. 32 This survey has been employed in this section of the thesis because it contains several questions on individuals’ concerns about becoming a

32 Citizenship Survey, UK Data Service https://discover.ukdataservice.ac.uk/series/?sn=200007 (accessed 12 May 2017).

99 victim crime and their views on crime in their locality. Moreover, and importantly for an investigation into individuals from an immigrant background, the HOCS also contains questions about people’s concerns about and personal experiences of harassment and assault because of their ethnicity, skin colour or religion.

The Labour Force Survey (LFS), meanwhile, is the largest household survey in the UK, conducted quarterly by the Office for National Statistics (ONS). Data from all four quarters of the 2010 LFS have been used in this chapter. The LFS studies the employment circumstances of the UK population, providing the official measures of employment and unemployment. Its aim, according to the ONS, is to produce statistics on matters which affect communities, such as ‘work, unemployment, training, retirement and looking after the family and home’. 33 As it has been documented that I.O. individuals have faced and continue to face disadvantage in the labour market, the LFS represents a useful data source to illustrate and further examine these disparities in relation to the indigenous UK populace.

The third survey used in this chapter is the 2010 EMBES. This was a survey that was conducted shortly after the 2010 general election with the aim of providing a ‘comprehensive resource covering the social and political attitudes, the electoral behaviour, and political integration … of the major established ethnic minorities in Britain- namely people of Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Afro-Caribbean and black African background’ (Heath et al., 2013: 7). The 2010 EMBES represents the first study of its kind since 1997 when a similar smaller study was conducted that sought to analyse UK ethnic minorities and how they compare with the majority white British population. Like its earlier counterpart, the 2010 EMBES was integrated with the main British Election Study (BES) (Ibid.). The EMBES has been used in this chapter because it contains questions on individuals’ direct experiences of prejudice and discrimination which are absent from other surveys. In addition, the EMBES includes a larger sample entirely composed of ethnic minority respondents. However, as this survey consists entirely of ethnic minority respondents, it is, therefore, impossible to illustrate and to explore the experiences of white people who are of immigrant-origin, which in turn renders it impossible to demonstrate how the experiences of both of these immigrant-origin groups differ, both from the native British population and from each other. Unfortunately, similar quantitative data documenting the I.O. white population’s experiences of discrimination does not exist.

The EMBES does at least, however, allow us to illustrate how the efforts to address discrimination are in the interests of BAME individuals who constitute a large proportion of

33 Labour Force Survey, Office for National Statistics https://www.ons.gov.uk/surveys/informationforhouseholdsandindividuals/householdandindividualsurveys/lab ourforcesurveylfs (accessed 27 September 2018).

100

Britain’s immigrant-origin population, as this chapter will go on to show. Although these data do not reveal anything about white people who are of immigrant-origin, it is possible, as has been suggested in the findings of qualitative research (see, e.g., Rzepnikowska, 2019) that white people from an immigrant background, such as migrants from A8 countries such as Poland will similarly benefit from legislators highlighting and taking action to alleviate discrimination.

Adjustments to the Datasets

A number of changes were made to the aforementioned datasets used in this chapter to explore the ways in which the interests of I.O. individuals differ from the native population.

Firstly, the immigrant-origin white category present in the later Figures consists of respondents who identify as ‘Other White’ as opposed to white British in the LFS and HOCS. 34 Meanwhile, the BAME category in the Figures found later in the chapter consists of respondents who used one of the black, Asian or mixed-race categories present in these surveys to describe their ethnic identity.

To investigate the white I.O. population more closely, countries represented in the LFS sample have been largely grouped depending upon their geographical location or, in the case of the ‘Anglosphere’ category, a shared language. This re-coded category includes a group of countries outside of the UK (Ireland, Canada, United States, Australia and New Zealand) where English is the main language and where, in some cases, many citizens and residents have ancestral ties to the UK. It is debatable whether or not South Africa can be considered as an Anglosphere country as English is spoken as a first language by only a minority of South Africans. 35 Furthermore, white South Africans are a minority ethnic group, whereas the Anglosphere countries are majority white and English-speaking. For these reasons, South Africa has not been coded as an Anglosphere nation.

Generally, the regions used in this analysis have been established by the United Nations, although several changes have been made. 36 The Baltic States, (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania) are considered to be part of Northern Europe by the UN, however, in this chapter; they have been grouped alongside other post-Communist states in Central and Eastern Europe. Due to the high levels of migration to Britain from these countries following their

34 ‘Irish’ is included in the ‘Other White’ category in both of these surveys. 35 Census 2011: Census in Brief, Statistics South Africa http://www.statssa.gov.za/census/census_2011/census_products/Census_2011_Census_in_brief.pdf (accessed 10 May 2017). 36 For further information on how the UN divides countries by region, see the United Nations Statistics Division - http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/m49/m49regin.htm (accessed 10 May 2017).

101 accession to the European Union in 2004, I concluded that the Baltic States had more in common with Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic and Slovakia than the Nordic countries which formed part of the revised Northern and Western Europe category. The UN places the United Kingdom (which is included alongside the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man) in northern Europe, although in this analysis the UK forms its own category. Western Europe has been combined with Northern Europe owing to the smaller number of cases found in the sample from this region. Respondents from a variety of different countries in Africa, South and Central America and Asia (including the Middle East) form the ‘Rest of the World’ category, which has been formed owing to a small number of cases.

These amendments to the LFS dataset are displayed visually below in Table 4.1 which shows the sample based on respondents’ country of birth or the category under which their country of birth has been designated. As the title of the table states, only immigrant-origin whites have been included. The largest group represented are white people with an immigrant background who were born in the United Kingdom, while a sizeable number of post-Communist cases are present in the LFS white immigrant-origin sample, constituting almost one-quarter of the overall sample. Smaller proportions of white people who qualify as immigrant-origin who were born in the remaining categories (Western & Northern Europe, Southern Europe or in the Rest of the World) are also present.

Table 4. 1. Re-coded regions by country of birth (I.O. whites only) Country of Birth Frequency %

United Kingdom 8,744 41.4

Anglosphere 2,819 13.4

Western & Northern 1,609 7.6 Europe

Post-Communist 4,771 22.6 Bloc

Southern Europe 1,591 7.5

Rest of the World 1,577 7.5

TOTAL 21,111 100.00

Source: LFS 2010

102

In the Citizenship Survey, minor changes were made to the equivalent Country of Birth variable. The United Kingdom, Rep. Ireland, China, Hong Kong, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Jamaica, in addition to the countries that have been categorised by the survey as belonging to ‘East Africa Commonwealth’, ‘Rest of New Commonwealth’ and ‘Other’ were available in the original survey. However, due to the small number of cases, all respondents born in one of these countries or regions, with the exception of the UK and the Irish Republic, were merged to form a category labelled as ‘Other’. As explained earlier, the definition of immigrant-origin that is applied in this dissertation includes individuals who have or did have at least one parent who was a foreign national. The Citizenship Survey asks its respondents to provide their parents’ country or countries of birth; however, the selection of countries offered to respondents is, aside from the generic ‘Other’ category, very narrow and so the only country from which meaningful data can be acquired is the Republic of Ireland.

Additionally, two changes were likewise made to the EMBES. All ethnic groups were re- coded into one single BAME category in order to get the thoughts of ethnic minorities as a collective.

As the EMBES offers a wide range of ethnic categories to respondents by which they can describe their ethnicity, these categories were re-coded into three broad categories. The first of these is an ‘Asian’ category that includes individuals of Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi and ‘Other Asian’ descent. The second, meanwhile, groups individuals of black Caribbean, black African and ‘Other Black’ ethnicity together to form a single ‘black’ category. The third and final category combines all individuals who described their ethnicity as ‘Mixed’ (mixed white and black Caribbean, mixed white and black African, mixed white and Asian and any other mixed background). A small issue occurred when deciding what to do with those who selected ‘Any Other’ to describe their ethnic background. However, owing to its small size (n= 11) and because it did not fit neatly into another category, it was thus coded as ‘missing’.

Differences and Similarities in Interests within Different Areas of Policy

In order to effectively assess whether or not and the extent to which immigrant-origin MPs have substantively represented the immigrant-origin public, four policy areas have, as has been mentioned earlier, been selected for closer investigation in this dissertation. These have been selected on the basis that there are observable clear disparities and differences between individuals of immigrant-origin and the majority native British population. This does not purport to be, by any means, a complete list of possible policy areas which could be

103 used to adequately examine the substantive representation of immigrant-origin individuals. As highlighted later in the dissertation, one of the ways in which this research could be further developed in the future is by analysing MPs’ responsiveness to other policy areas in which the interests of the immigrant-origin and native populations differ.

Health

As noted in the introductory chapter, this thesis examines the association between descriptive and substantive representation in regard to health by using two case studies: cardiovascular disease and mental ill-health.

Extant research highlights how the interests of immigrant-origin individuals differ from the native population in relation to these two broad health conditions. These studies observe that cardiovascular disease (CVD) along with the risk factors that are associated with this condition (see, e.g., Abbotts, Harding & Cruickshank, 2004; Karlsen & Nazroo, 2009) and mental ill-health (Bhugra, 2004; Raphaely & O’Moore, 2010; Weich et al., 2004) have disproportionately affected individuals from an immigrant background. In addition, the risk factors of these conditions are broadly associated with lower socioeconomic status. Analysis of the 2011 census by the Centre on the Dynamics of Ethnicity (CoDE) has found that all ethnic groups are more likely than the white British majority to live in neighbourhoods with higher levels of deprivation 37 than the white population, with the greatest disparities being observed between ethnic Pakistanis and Bangladeshis and white Britons (Jivraj & Khan, 2013).

While smoking, obesity, a poor diet and an inactive lifestyle have all been identified as risk factors, ethnicity remains a significant determinant of CVD as people of South Asian and African ethnicity across a number of different societies have a greater likelihood of developing risk factors associated with CVD, such as high blood pressure, hypertension and type 2 diabetes (McBean et al., 2004; Raleigh, 1997; Ujcic-Voortman et al., 2009). Furthermore, language barriers and cultural concerns may discourage individuals from ethnic minority backgrounds from acquiring more knowledge about the condition and from seeking medical advice about either cardiovascular disease and its risk factors (Bundey et al., 1991) or mental health conditions and issues related to mental ill-health (Lindert et al., 2008).

37 The seven measures of deprivation used in this report are as follows: income, employment, health, education, barriers to housing/services, crime & living environment.

104

Discrimination

Discrimination and other forms of prejudice, namely discrimination and other forms of prejudice on the grounds of race or ethnicity, skin colour, country of origin and, in certain cases religion, have affected and continue to affect individuals of immigrant heritage in the UK. Similarly, the overrepresentation of ethnic minorities among stop and search suspects, deaths in police custody and in rates of incarceration compared to native Britons are regarded as evidence that police and the criminal justice system have engaged in discrimination against suspects from certain immigrant backgrounds (James, 2006; Newburn, Shiner & Hayman, 2004; Phillips & Bowling, 2017; Waddington, Stenson & Don, 2004).

Although research into direct discrimination against white immigrants, especially those from Eastern and Central Europe is less well developed (Burrell, 2010; Fox, 2013), examples of racist incidents suggest this has been a problem in recent years (Fox, Morosanu & Szilassy, 2015; Rzepnikowska, 2019). Owing to the fact that there are only limited data, it is difficult to ascertain whether or not white people with foreign connections have had similar experiences in the country. However, qualitative data has suggested that first-generation white immigrants may have had experiences of prejudice and discrimination similar to those who make up Britain’s BAME population (Rzepnikowska, 2019).

Moreover, it has been observed that individuals from an immigrant background continue to face difficulties in accessing the labour market, a feature which persists even after other factors such as fewer skills, formal qualifications and residence in more deprived parts of the country are taken into account (Currie, 2007; Heath & Cheung, 2007; Heath & Yu, 2005; Khattab & Fox, 2016). According to EMBES data, just over one-third of ethnic minorities reported that they had experienced discrimination or have been unfairly treated in the last five years because of their ‘ethnicity, race, skin colour, language, accent, religion, age, gender, sexuality or disability’ (Table 4.2). Among those who answered this question in the affirmative, a sizeable majority of 70 per cent claimed that they had experienced discrimination either ‘often’ or ‘sometimes’ in their lives. These data have been presented below in Table 4.3.

105

Table 4. 2. Experienced discrimination in the last five years % Yes 35.4 No 60.7 Don’t Know 3.9

N = 2,765 Source: EMBES 2010 (weighted data)

Table 4. 3. Frequency of discrimination experienced % Often 15.2 Sometimes 53.7 Rarely 31.2 N = 999 Source: EMBES 2010 (weighted data)

However, these data on their own do not reveal a very detailed picture as the various options available to respondents such as age, disability and sexuality do not relate to their immigrant background. Therefore, it makes sense to pay attention to a follow-up question, directed at those who had experienced discrimination or unfair treatment. This question asked respondents to select all available options from the aforementioned list that apply to them (‘ethnicity, race, skin colour, language, accent, religion, age, gender, sexuality or disability’). In responding to this question, a large proportion claimed that they had been discriminated against because of their ‘ethnicity, race or skin colour’. Conversely, only small minorities of respondents claimed that they had been discriminated against because of at least one of these other reasons. While it is possible that ethnic minorities may have received less favourable treatment for multiple different reasons, these data show that when ethnic minorities report personal experience of discrimination, their ethnicity, race and skin colour were the primary reasons or were among the reasons why they were discriminated against or received unfair treatment.

106

Table 4. 4. Experienced discrimination on the grounds of ethnicity, race or skin colour % Yes 79.9 No 20.1

N = 1,003 Source: EMBES 2010 (weighted data)

When disaggregating the above data, we can observe that this holds true across different ethnic groups (Figure 4.1) although black people and individuals of mixed heritage were more likely than Asians to affirm that they had been discriminated against because of their ethnicity, race or skin colour.

Figure 4. 1. Discriminated against on the grounds of ethnicity, race or skin colour 100 90

70 60 50 Yes 40

Percentage (%) Percentage 30 No 20 10 0 Asian Black Mixed Ethnic Background N = 998 Source: EMBES 2010 (weighted data)

This section has demonstrated that a sizeable minority of individuals belonging to an ethnic minority in the United Kingdom believe that they have personally experienced discrimination at least during some part of the previous five years of their life. Among BAME individuals who have been subject to discriminatory practices, a significant majority reported being discriminated against on a regular or occasional basis. Among those who felt that they had been a victim of discrimination, a large majority reported that they had been discriminated

107 against or treated in a less than equitable manner because of their ethnicity, race or skin colour.

Finally, we can see that, as was highlighted in the previous section on health, discrimination is an important issue for individuals from a minority ethnic background according to the documented disparities model. While it is less clear that the alleviation of discrimination is as important to white individuals who come from an immigrant background, examples from research suggest that white immigrants to the UK could also benefit from MPs substantively representing these issues. The later chapter on prejudice and discrimination expands on this discussion and views Members of Parliament who address types of discrimination that pertain to people from an immigrant background in their parliamentary questions as providing substantive representation to immigrant-origin members of the public.

Crime and the Criminal Justice System

Data reveals that certain sections of the British I.O. population are at a greater risk of becoming victims of a range of different crimes; for instance, homicide (Parmar, 2014; Phillips & Bowling, 2017), other types of violent crime and theft (Rossetti, Dinisman & Maroz, 2016), personal offences (Jansson, 2006), vehicle theft (Salisbury & Upson, 2004) and racially and religiously motivated hate crime (Corcoran, Lader & Smith, 2015). In addition, immigrant-origin individuals have shown a greater tendency to feel anxious and concerned about becoming a victim of crime (Salisbury & Upson, 2004).

The higher levels of concern about criminal activity exhibited by immigrant-origin individuals, especially ethnic minorities, is illustrated visually in Figure 4.2 using Citizenship Survey data. Among those who stated that they felt ‘fairly worried’, ‘not very worried’ or ‘not at all worried’, there is little difference between the three ethnic groups. However, the proportion of ethnic minorities who report to being ‘very worried’ about being a victim of crime is twice as high as the proportion of white people who expressed the same view. A variety of research has documented that among ethnic minorities who have been victims of crime there is a fairly persistent belief that the crime(s) of which they were a victim was racially motivated (Bowling, Parmar & Phillips, 2003; Fitzgerald & Hale, 1996).

108

Figure 4. 2. Worry about becoming a victim of crime in general

15 Very worried 7 7

32 Fairly worried 24 27

36 Not very worried 47 44

18 Not at all worried 22 22

0 10 20 30 40 50 BAME I.O. White White British

N = 16934. Source: HOCS 2010-11

The exercise was repeated as above in Figure 4.2 except that this time, only white people who are of immigrant-origin, categorised by their country of birth, were included. These findings indicate is that the attitudes of Anglosphere-born I.O. whites closely mirror those born in a country coded as ‘Other’. British-born white people who qualify as immigrant-origin were, in other words, more concerned about becoming victims of crime.

109

Figure 4. 3. Worry about becoming a victim of crime in general (I.O. Whites by country of birth)

7 Very worried 5 11 22 Fairly worried 17 33

48 Not very worried 52 42

23 Not at all worried 27 14

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Other ROI/Aus/NZ/Can UK

N = 1016 Source: HOCS 2010-11

An earlier analysis of the British Crime Survey (BCS) concludes that age structure, socioeconomic characteristics and residential location explain why ethnic minorities are more likely to be victims of crime or serious threat (Fitzgerald & Hale, 1996). As highlighted earlier, ethnic minority groups are more likely to live in deprived neighbourhoods, and as crime is included as one of the measures of deprivation, it is, therefore, unsurprising that ethnic minorities are more likely to be wary about levels of crime and the threat posed by criminals to themselves and their families.

In terms of specific types of crime, data from the Citizenship Survey demonstrates that, unsurprisingly, ethnic minorities are much more concerned about becoming a victim of a racially motivated assault (Figure 4.4). This suggests that white people who are of immigrant-origin do not worry about being subject to this type of crime to the same extent as ethnic minorities because their ethnic background is not immediately clear from their physical appearance. This is supported by the results displayed in Figure 4.5 in which only data for white people who are of immigrant-origin are included. In contrast to the previous comparisons, we observe only small differences between British-born white people who are of immigrant-origin and white individuals born in countries coded as ‘Other’. The figures for white people born in the Anglosphere are noteworthy as they suggest that white individuals born in the Anglosphere are significantly less concerned about being racially assaulted.

110

Visibility may be an important factor in how individuals assess their level of risk from a potential racially or religiously motivated assault. While white people born abroad may believe that they are possible targets because of their nationality, they are less concerned than ethnic minorities about being subjected to this type of assault because they are aware that they are not immediately identified as distinct from other members of society.

Figure 4. 4. Worry about being physically attacked because of your skin colour, ethnic origin or religion

8 Very worried 3 2

17 Fairly worried 7 5

41 Not very worried 35 25

35 Not at all worried 55 68

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

BAME I.O. White White British

N = 16905 Source: HOCS 2010-11

111

Figure 4. 5. Worry about being physically attacked because of your skin colour, ethnic origin or religion (I.O. Whites by country of birth)

4 Very worried 0.4 2

8 Fairly worried 3 5

38 Not very worried 15 41

50 Not at all worried 82 53

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Other ROI/Aus/NZ/Can UK

N = 1023 Source: HOCS 2010-11

In questions about their local areas, the findings presented below in Figures 4.6 & 4.7 follow an almost identical pattern to that which was illustrated in the previous two charts. As shown in Figure 4.6, individuals who identify as BAME are more likely to cite racial harassment in their local area as a ‘very big’ or ‘fairly big’ problem. 38 White Britons, on the other hand, are more likely to believe that racial harassment is not a significant issue in their local area. The responses of white people who are of immigrant-origin, as presented in Figure 4.7, show negligible difference between immigrant-origin whites based on their country of birth, although there is a proportionately large difference between white people born elsewhere in the Anglosphere and white people from an immigrant background who were born in either the UK or a country that is categorised as ‘Other’ who feel that racial and or religious assault is a ‘fairly big’ problem in their neighbourhoods.

In general, there are much clearer distinctions in Figure 4.6 than in Figure 4.7 where adjustments have been made to the I.O. white cases. We see from the earlier chart that ethnic minorities are more likely to believe that racial harassment is a serious problem in the area in which they reside. This may be attributed to the fact that a higher proportion of minorities claim that they have experienced personal harassment because of their ethnicity,

38 Local area is defined as the area within the radius of a 15-20 minute walk of the respondent’s address.

112 skin colour or religion (Figure 4.8). Similarly, their higher levels of physical ‘visibility’ may also explain why ethnic minorities are more likely to view racial harassment as a serious issue in their neighbourhoods.

Overall, white people from an immigrant background gave similar responses, regardless of their country of origin. Their perceptions of racial and religious harassment appear to make little difference as to how they perceive racial harassment, as Figure 4.7 shows only slight differences depending on the country of their birth.

Figure 4. 6. ‘How much of a problem is racial or religious harassment (in your local area) even if it doesn't affect you personally?’

3 Very big problem 2 1

10 Fairly big problem 6 4

45 Not a very big problem 37 30

42 Not a problem at all 56 65

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

BAME I.O. White White British

N = 16149 Source: HOCS 2010-11

113

Figure 4. 7. ‘How much of a problem is racial or religious harassment (in your local area) even if it doesn't affect you personally?’ (I.O. Whites by country of birth).

2 Very big problem 0.3 1

7 Fairly big problem 2 6

36 Not a very big problem 37 37

55 Not a problem at all 62 56

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Other ROI/Aus/NZ/Can UK

N = 949 Source : HOCS 2010-11

Other data from the Citizenship Survey data show that black and minority ethnic individuals are more likely to claim that they have had personal experience of harassment because of their skin colour, ethnic origin or religion in the last two years (see Figure 4.8). Relative to the white British population, white individuals from immigrant backgrounds were also considerably more likely to make similar claims. When only immigrant-origin white individuals are retained in the sample (Figure 4.9), what is noticeable is that an almost negligible proportion of white people born in the Anglosphere, a mere one per cent, say that they have been subjected to one of these types of harassment over the course of the last two years. Higher proportions of white individuals from an immigrant background were born in the UK or in a country categorised here under ‘Other’ gave similar responses. These data provide some indication of why white people born in the Anglosphere demonstrated less concern about being a victim of harassment (Figure 4.5). Personal experience of racial, ethnic or religious assault might prompt an individual to view harassment as a problem. As only a tiny minority of white individuals born elsewhere in the Anglosphere state that they have experienced harassment in recent years (Figure 4.9) this may explain their lack of concern about becoming the victim of assault.

114

Figure 4. 8. Personal experience of harassment on the grounds of skin colour, ethnic origin or religion (in your local area) during the last two years

13 BAME 87

7 I.O. White 93

2 White British 98

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

YES NO

N = 16959 Source: HOCS 2010-11

Figure 4. 9. Personal experience of harassment on the grounds of skin colour, ethnic origin or religion (in your local area) during the last two years (I.O. Whites by country of birth)

9 Other 91

1 ROI/Aus/NZ/Can 99

7 UK 93

0 20 40 60 80 100

YES NO

N = 1025 Source : HOCS 2010-11

To conclude this section, the data reveals that I.O. individuals, in particular, ethnic minorities, are more anxious about becoming a victim of crime in a general sense, more likely to worry about becoming a victim of racial or religious harassment and to perceive these types of

115 harassment to be significant problems in their local communities. Among whites from an immigrant background, however, we find much narrower differences in attitudes, both between foreign-born white I.O. individuals and native Britons. In general, white I.O. individuals exhibit less concern about being a victim of crime and view the threat of racial and religious assault, both to themselves and in the areas in which they reside, as less serious. This could be attributed to greater levels of invisibility, compared to BAME individuals, which explains why whites who are of immigrant-origin adopt attitudes which are more closely aligned to those held by white Britons.

The data presented above further illustrates that efforts to curb and prevent crime, and measures to allay people’s fear of crime are among the interests of the British immigrant- origin population. The later chapter on crime and the criminal justice system will examine how crime and topics relating to crime and the CJS are discussed in parliamentary questions and MPs’ likelihood of tabling questions addressing these subjects.

The Labour Market

Research demonstrates that there are differences between the native and immigrant-origin populations in relation to employment and the labour market. Most notably, individuals from an immigrant background have faced and continue to face disadvantages both in employment and when trying to access the labour market.

Starting with the former, I.O. individuals have had lower levels of success in securing employment than native Britons (Frijters, Shields & Wheatley Price, 2005; Hatton & Tani, 2005), especially during economic downturns (Khattab & Fox, 2016). Recent census data have revealed disparities in labour market participation rates between native British and immigrant-origin individuals aged between the ages of 25 and 49 (Nazroo & Kapadia, 2013b).

Furthermore, individuals from certain immigrant backgrounds have exhibited a higher tendency to be working in part-time and non-permanent forms of employment (Nazroo & Kapadia, 2013b). The employment ‘gap’ that exists and continues to persist between the indigenous population of the UK and those of immigrant heritage (see, e.g., Currie, 2007; Heath & Cheung, 2007; Khattab & Fox, 2016) has been attributed to a lack of human capital; in other words, lower levels of knowledge about the British labour market and maybe also a lack of English language skills and formal qualifications (Clark & Drinkwater, 2007). However, as Chapter 8 covers in more detail, this ‘gap’ in employment has been, in part, attributed to discrimination on the part of employers (Esmail & Everington, 1993; Heath & Cheung, 2007; Khattab & Fox, 2016).

116

Figure 4.10 shows that BAME individuals are twice as likely to cite their inability to find full- time employment as the reason why they are taking part-time work. After making adjustments to whites who are of immigrant-origin, we can observe similar patterns. Eastern and southern Europeans, in addition to those who originate from a nation placed in the ‘Rest of the World’ category, are more likely to give the same reason why they cannot secure full- time work. As expected, proportionally fewer individuals from the east and south of Europe claim that they did not want a full-time job. These individuals might be at a disadvantage in the workplace because they may lack the language skills compared to those who were born in, and or are nationals of the UK or other Anglosphere countries, where English is the main language.

Higher proportions of white Britons and white people with immigrant roots have opted to take part-time work because they do not wish to work full-time. This suggests that both of these groups and white Britons in particular, have more freedom when it comes to selecting which type of employment they wish to pursue compared to BAME individuals. Individuals from a BAME background, conversely, have less flexibility and therefore that they have no other option but to seek full-time work. A higher proportion of immigrant-origin whites who originate from eastern, southern Europe and from other parts of the world claimed that their inability to find full-time employment was the reason for taking part-time work. People from southern and eastern Europe are also more likely to be in full-time education.

Figure 4. 10. Reason for taking part-time work

50 40 White British

OtherI.O. White White 30 (%) Percentage BMEBAME 20

0 Did not want Ill/disabled Could not find Student or at full-time job full-time job school

N = 13191 Source : LFS 2010

117

Figure 4. 11. Reason for taking part-time work (I.O. whites by country of birth)

90 80 70

60 50 40

Percentage (%) Percentage 30 Did not want full-time job 20 Could not find full-time job 10 Ill or disabled 0 Student or at school

Country of Birth by Region

N = 602 Source: LFS 2010

The chart below (Figure 4.12) shows that immigrant-origin individuals are more likely than white Britons to be working in a job that is not permanent and is, therefore, insecure. The gap between white Britons and white people from an immigrant background is not especially pronounced, however, the proportion of ethnic minorities who are in non-permanent work is proportionally twice as high as white Britons. This may indicate that non-permanent employment is a problem that predominantly concerns ethnic minorities; however, the following chart (Figure 4.13) reveals that similar disparities exist between white I.O. individuals. British-born white people who are of immigrant-origin and I.O. whites from southern Europe are the least likely to be in employment that is not permanent. Meanwhile, those born in the Anglosphere, in other European regions, or a country categorised as belonging to the ‘Rest of the World’ are proportionally more likely to be working in non- permanent jobs.

118

Figure 4. 12. ‘Is your job permanent or not permanent in some way’?

BAME

I.O. White

White British

0 20 40 60 80 100

Permanent Not permanent in some way

N = 40015 Source: LFS 2010

Figure 4. 13. ‘Is your job permanent or not permanent in some way’? (I.O. whites by country of birth)

100 90

70 60 50 40

Percentage (%) Percentage 30 20 Not permanent in some way 10 0 Permanent

Country of Birth by Region

N = 2368 Source: LFS 2010

119

The above data relating to the labour market (Figures 4.12 and 4.13) illustrate that there is a significant disparity between the ability of immigrant-origin and native individuals to secure permanent employment. A later chapter explores the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation of the interests of immigrant-origin individuals in regard to the labour market through an analysis of parliamentary questions.

Chapter Summary

This chapter has investigated and demonstrated where the interests of immigrant-origin individuals lie. In doing so, its primary aim has been to explore how individuals from a white immigrant background and ethnic minorities are different from each other and from native Britons in relation to the four areas of policy that are used in this thesis to explore the nature of the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation in relation to I.O. individuals.

As discussed above, there has been a discussion in literature concerning the existence of an ‘ethnic agenda’ which is distinct from the agenda that is shared by the majority white population. Studies have concluded that ethnic minorities do not subscribe to a separate ‘ethnic’ agenda as such; although, it has been hypothesised that they have different political priorities and perspectives on issues compared to white people. Evidence from the research into the existence of a so-called ethnic agenda suggests that immigrant-origin individuals do not tend to differ significantly from native Britons in their beliefs and attitudes. As a consequence, it would be inappropriate to use the survey data approach as a means to determine the interests of the immigrant-origin population and to measure substantive representation.

Research into different policy areas does, however, highlight that there are disparities between the native and immigrant-origin populations. These disparities help us to identify where the interests of immigrant-origin individuals lie and provide a basis upon which to analyse the link between descriptive and substantive representation. In several of the policy areas featured in this analysis, a common pattern is observed. The most pronounced differences are often found to be between the indigenous Britons and ethnic minorities. While there are clear and sometimes stark differences between white people and ethnic minorities, we find that in a number of policy areas, there is little that separates the interests of immigrant-origin whites on the basis of their nationality or their country of birth. That being said, the data presented above reveals that white immigrant-origin individuals differ depending on the region in which their country of birth is located. For instance, I.O. whites

120 from Southern Europe and countries that make up the Post-Communist bloc in Central and Eastern Europe are more likely to be working part-time because they were unable to find full- time work.

Next, through using data from the 2010 EMBES, we can see that one in three individuals from a minority ethnic background claim that they have personal experience of discrimination during the last five years. Individuals who had reported discrimination claimed that they had been subjected to discrimination ‘often’ or ‘sometimes’ during this time period. When able to express the different way or ways in which they had been discriminated against, a large majority (80 per cent) said they had been discriminated against on the grounds of their ethnicity, race or skin colour.

Citizenship Survey data reveals that immigrant-origin citizens, namely ethnic minorities, are more concerned about being subject to racial and or ethnic assault. Similarly, proportionally higher numbers of I.O. individuals, and in particular ethnic minorities, report personal experience(s) of racial, ethnic or religious harassment than the indigenous British. Figures taken from the Labour Force Survey demonstrate similar differences between ethnic groups. A higher proportion of immigrant-origin individuals are in non-permanent occupations. Ethnic minorities and white individuals from Central, Eastern and Southern Europe were more likely to be in part-time work because they have been unable to find full-time employment.

This empirical chapter has presented data which will be used in the following four chapters to examine the extent to which MPs have, or have not, represented the interests of immigrant-origin citizens in the parliamentary questions that they submitted to ministers during the 2010-15 Parliament. By electing to focus for the most part on documented disparities with regards to certain issues and policies, there is a wider scope through which to assess whether or not and the extent to which immigrant-origin Members of Parliament have substantively represented the immigrant-origin population.

121

Chapter 5. Evidence of Substantive Representation in Different Policy Areas: Health

The first of this dissertation’s policy area chapters investigates whether immigrant-origin Members of Parliament demonstrated a greater tendency to substantively represent the health interests of immigrant-origin individuals. It does so by focusing on the interests of this demographic in relation to cardiovascular disease and its associated risk factors in addition to mental health conditions.

The decision to focus on more specific health conditions as opposed to disparities between immigrant-origin and native Britons in relation to health and healthcare more generally was taken because health issues are a frequent topic in parliamentary questions. As the data presented in the Determining Interests chapter show, the number of questions submitted to the Department for Health during the 2010-15 Parliament far exceeded the number of questions received by other government departments, bodies or organisations. Meanwhile, the decision to focus on cardiovascular disease and mental ill-health, in particular, was taken because both have been shown to be more likely to affect individuals from across a range of immigrant communities in the United Kingdom than the native British population (Abbotts, Harding & Cruickshank, 2004; Karlsen & Nazroo, 2009; Leavey, 1999; Weich et al., 2004).

As discussed earlier in the dissertation and in the Theory chapter, in particular, it is argued that societal groups which are descriptively underrepresented among holders of legislative office are better represented by elected officials with whom they share similar traits or characteristics. Descriptive representatives are thought to be more likely to articulate and understand the interests of those whom they descriptively represent (Dovi, 2002; Mansbridge, 1999, 2003; Phillips, 1998). This theory would, in the context of British politics, thus suggest that immigrant-origin Members of the House of Commons will be more likely to substantively represent the health interests of immigrant-origin citizens and residents than MPs who did not have an immigrant background.

This chapter adopts two approaches to quantifying the extent to which MPs substantively represented CVD and mental health in their parliamentary questions. Firstly, it examines the likelihood of MPs submitting questions relating to either or both CVD and mental health, which this chapter refers to as I.O. Health. Secondly, it examines MPs’ tendencies to table questions addressing CVD and mental health individually, as both of these are broad medical conditions which require different types of treatment and attention when it comes to

122 legislation and the formation of policy. Consequently, it is possible, as this chapter observes later on, that some MPs will have been more likely to represent one rather than the other.

The rest of this chapter is structured as follows: next, it outlines a number of different hypotheses along with some theoretical discussion on descriptive and substantive representation. This is followed by a section that provides further background information on cardiovascular disease and mental health and how they pertain to individuals of immigrant- origin. The final part of the chapter, meanwhile, consists of the presentation and a discussion of the results.

The chapter finds that immigrant-origin MPs were, in fact, less likely to substantively represent the health interests of I.O. individuals in relation to CVD and mental health than native MPs, as demonstrated by their lower tendency to submit questions relating to cardiovascular disease and mental health. However, ethnic minority MPs, who account for a significant proportion of immigrant-origin MPs, were more inclined to substantively represent these interests than white MPs. These findings indicate that non-European ancestry is more important than simply having an immigrant background when it comes to representing matters that more broadly concern individuals in the UK who come from an immigrant background.

Hypotheses

Studies which have explored minority group representation in the House of Commons demonstrate that minority MPs were more likely to represent the interests of minority citizens (Kolpinskaya, 2017; Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013; Saalfeld & Kyriakopoulou, 2011). Using this research as a guide, this chapter expects to observe a similar result in regard to cardiovascular disease and mental health. The first hypothesis, therefore, reads as follows:

H1: Immigrant-origin MPs will have been more likely to have submitted parliamentary questions for written answer relating to cardiovascular disease and mental health.

Next, as the earlier discussion on the group consciousness literature has shown, individuals from a minority group, both elected representatives and members of the public, are thought to possess a group or collective consciousness (Dawson, 1994; Stokes-Brown, 2006; Tate,

123

1993; Wolfinger, 1965) which is, in turn, connected to the again aforementioned concept of linked fate (Dawson, 1994; Tate, 1993, 2003). In British politics, it is not immediately clear whether or not and the extent to which immigrant-origin MPs feel an added responsibility to substantively represent others who likewise hail from an immigrant background; however, there are indicators from empirical literature that, certainly among ethnic minority MPs, there is evidence of a group solidarity or consciousness (Nixon, 1998; Sobolewska, McKee & Campbell, 2018).

Furthermore, non-white ethnicity is known to put one at a greater risk of several of the risk factors associated with cardiovascular disease, such as high blood pressure, hypertension and type 2 diabetes. This qualifies CVD and its risk factors as more of an ethnic minority ‘issue’ which may, therefore, encourage BAME parliamentarians to submit more questions concerning CVD. Taking these points into consideration, BAME MPs may have been more likely to substantively represent these issues through parliamentary questions, cardiovascular disease in particular. The second hypothesis, therefore, is as follows:

H2: BAME parliamentarians were more likely to table questions relating to these health issues than their white colleagues.

As discussed in the Theory chapter, political parties have tended to be associated with different issues and policies depending on their political ideology. Parties of the centre-left such as Labour are more likely to be ‘associated’ with certain issues compared to others, namely health and education (John et al., 2013) while the Conservative Party has tended to be associated with defence and law and order (Quinn, 2008). In analyses of past general election manifestos, healthcare and social services were found to have been prioritised to a greater extent in Labour Party manifestos than in Conservative manifestos (Bara, 2006; Bara & Budge, 2001). Furthermore, according to the ‘issue ownership’ theory developed and explored by Petrocik (1996) which drew inspiration from the work Budge and Farlie (1983), parties and candidates emphasise and promote issues where they feel that they have an advantage compared to their rival parties and candidates among voters.

Due to Labour’s association with health and their perceived ‘ownership’ of the health issue more broadly, it is possible that Labour MPs will have shown a stronger interest in matters relating to health and healthcare than MPs from other parties. Hence, the chapter’s third hypothesis reads:

124

H3: MPs from the Labour Party were more inclined to submit a higher proportion of questions concerning cardiovascular disease and mental health than MPs from other parties.

As documented in the Methods chapter, MPs will often use parliamentary questions as a means to communicate to their constituents and to other members of the public the work that they are doing to represent them in Parliament, which typically involves expressing matters of concern for and relevance to their constituents (Franklin & Norton, 1993; Russo & Wiberg, 2010). As elected representatives, MPs are, by and large, interested in retaining their parliamentary seats; therefore, it seems likely that many MPs will respond to various electoral incentives when tabling parliamentary questions for written answer and when engaging in other activities such as asking oral questions, especially if they represent a marginal seat. Indeed, one would expect that MPs and their staff will have an awareness and knowledge of the general ‘profile’ of their constituency (urban or rural, affluent or more deprived). This information can, in turn, serve as a guide to MPs when ascertaining what is important to their constituencies and, by extension, their constituents.

Empirically, it has been demonstrated that legislators’ predisposition to represent matters relating to diversity and immigration to the UK correlates with the levels of racial and ethnic diversity in their constituencies (Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013). Similarly, MPs’ tendencies to represent matters of interest to pensioners and farmers may be influenced by their representing a constituency with a larger than average pensioner population or an agrarian constituency.

Therefore, it is predicted that MPs representing constituencies where statistics indicate that residents have higher rates of poor health will table a higher proportion of questions relating to CVD and its risk factors in addition to mental ill-health. The fourth and final hypothesis, therefore, reads as follows:

H4: Parliamentarians representing constituencies where there are various indicators that either demonstrate or indicate higher levels of ill-health, such as an older age profile, higher rates of self-reported bad or very bad health and levels of child poverty will have been more likely to have tabled questions addressing cardiovascular disease and mental health.

125

Selection of Health Issues to Examine Substantive Representation

As health and healthcare are very broad policy areas, MPs will typically submit a very high proportion of questions addressing health and healthcare. Hence, steps were taken to first identify health disparities between the immigrant-origin and host populations in order to make it easier to ascertain how the health interests may differ from the host population. As outlined in this section, cardiovascular disease and its risk factors in addition to poor mental health have been found to disproportionately affect immigrant-origin individuals. Additionally, both are broad medical conditions which are associated with a wide range of other conditions.

Cardiovascular Disease

Cardiovascular disease is a general term that encompasses diseases of the heart and circulation which are associated with the build-up of fatty deposits inside the arteries including heart attack and stroke. As documented in the earlier Determining Interests chapter, CVD is one of the leading causes of death and disability in the United Kingdom. Therefore, efforts made to reduce instances of cardiovascular disease and its risk factors and to improve the care and treatment afforded to those with the condition are fundamentally in the interests of many people in the United Kingdom, irrespective of their background. That being said, research has highlighted that those from an immigrant background are more susceptible to developing CVD-related problems (see, e.g., Abbotts, Harding & Cruickshank, 2004; Karlsen & Nazroo, 2009). Indeed, among immigrant-origin communities, cardiovascular disease has been the leading cause of morbidity and mortality among people of Afro-Caribbean and Irish origin (Abbotts, Harding & Cruickshank, 2004).

Although lifestyle factors such as a poor diet, inactivity, obesity and smoking put individuals at greater risk from cardiovascular disease (Smith, 2007; Sun, 2015; Winkleby et al., 1992), ethnicity does, however, remain a significant risk factor. Individuals of South Asian and African heritage are at an increased risk from CVD as people from these ethnic backgrounds are more likely to have risk factors associated with the condition, such as high blood pressure, hypertension and type 2 diabetes (McBean et al., 2004; Raleigh, 1997; Ujcic- Voortman et al., 2009).

126

Mental Health

Similarly, while mental health disorders have the potential to affect millions of people, studies have found, as noted earlier in the Determining Interests chapter, that many immigrants and individuals from a recent immigrant family background are at a higher risk of either having or developing a range of mental health conditions such as anxiety, depression and schizophrenia compared to the indigenous British population (Bhugra & Jones, 2001; Weich et al., 2004).

Additionally, in the case of migrants from markedly different cultural backgrounds, rates of poor mental health have been attributed to difficulties in adjusting to a new society and, in some cases, to aspects of a different culture (Bhugra, 2004). For instance, Raphaely & O’Moore (2010) found that refugees and asylum seekers experience higher rates of anxiety and depression compared to the national population and other migrants. Similarly, incidents of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) have been found to be prevalent among refugees admitted to psychiatric clinics (Grey, Lab & Young, 2010). Other research has noted higher recorded incidents of schizophrenia among migrant groups to the UK compared to the native population, including higher rates of admission (Bhugra & Jones, 2001; Cochrane & Bal, 1987). This is not restricted to first-generation migrants; rates of schizophrenia in the British Afro-Caribbean community have been found to be higher in both first and second generations than in the indigenous population (Harrison, et al., 1988; Harrison, et al., 1997).

While research documents that immigrant-origin individuals, on average, are more predisposed to developing certain mental health issues, studies also highlight variation between different immigrant communities. The EMPIRIC study, for instance, found slight, yet notable differences between ethnic groups residing in England. It observed that the most common mental disorders (CMD), anxiety and depression, were more prevalent among middle-aged Irish and Pakistani men and older Indian women compared to white Britons in the same ages cohorts (Weich et al., 2004). Other research has found, for instance, that although levels of suicide vary between ethnic groups, Irish and Indians have above average rates of suicide whereas Pakistanis and Bangladeshis have rates below the national average (Leavey, 1999).

It is important to highlight that studies analysing racial and ethnic disparities in regard to health have generally focused on health disparities between white Britons and ethnic minority communities (Karlsen & Nazroo, 2009). Meanwhile, research into white immigrant communities in the UK, as documented in the Introduction chapter, typically focuses heavily on the Irish, one of the largest and most established migrant communities in the country (see,

127 e.g., Clucas, 2009; Das-Munshi et al., 2013; Kelleher & Hillier, 1996). Conversely, there is a dearth of studies focusing on other white immigrant-origin groups in the UK, such as Eastern European migrants, many of whom are more recent settlers in the UK. Reports have previously indicated high levels of suicide and depression among Polish migrant workers, although this has been an unexplored area of research (Lakasing & Mirza, 2009). Consequently, it is more difficult to ascertain both the extent and nature of possible health disparities between white people who are of immigrant-origin and the native white British population. Our understanding of the health interests of I.O. white individuals is, therefore, driven by findings from research into the UK Irish community, which may not provide the most accurate picture of the health interests of white immigrant-origin individuals more broadly.

How did MPs discuss CVD and mental health in their parliamentary questions?

This section of the chapter explores the types of words and language that are used by Members when discussing matters related to cardiovascular disease and mental health in their parliamentary questions using, as noted in the earlier Methods chapter, a device known as collocation. In the first of these collocate tables (Table 5.1) the words that co-occur strongly with cardiovascular disease in questions for written answer tabled by native and immigrant-origin MPs. Supplementary data on these collocates and others that feature in this dissertation can be found in Appendix III.

As can be seen from observing both sets of collocates included in Table 5.1, many of the collocates are words that we would expect to find in discussions regarding matters to do with medical conditions; for instance, ‘diagnosis’, ‘respiratory’, ‘suffering’, ‘high’ and ‘risk’. Meanwhile, others, such as ‘newham’ and ‘65’ are more unusual, appearing because of a series of questions that were submitted requesting information on the number of men and women over the age of 65 who died of cardiovascular disease in the London borough of Newham. Where native and immigrant-origin MPs appear to differ, however, is that the latter group of MPs include words such as ‘implementing’, ‘groups’ and ‘commissioning’. Although it is hard to draw conclusions from these findings alone, the presence of these words may indicate that MPs from an immigrant background were more inclined to take a more ‘proactive’ approach to address cardiovascular disease than native British MPs. That being said, one should consider that observations or patterns noted in this as well as in later collocation tables can be driven by a small number of I.O. MPs asking a relatively large number of questions. In this particular instance, a majority of questions containing the words

128

‘cardiovascular disease’ originated from just two I.O. MPs, Chris Ruane (Lab, Vale of Clwyd) and Virendra Sharma (Lab, Ealing Southall).

Table 5. 1. Collocates for cardiovascular disease in questions tabled by Native & I.O. MPs Native respiratory, outcomes, newham, mortality, suffering, diagnosis, strategy, died, 65, recorded Immigrant-origin outcomes, factors, strategy, implementing, groups, commissioning, high, risk, recent, as

Meanwhile, in Table 5.2, collocates for cardiovascular disease are listed according to MPs’ ethnicity. Across all three ethnic categories it is once again observed that the words that co- occur most strongly with cardiovascular disease are words that are often used in relation to the condition, for example, ‘suffering’, ‘risk’ and ‘diagnosed’. However, as shown in Table 5.2, we find that words such as ‘implementing’ and ‘commissioning’ and other similar words (guidelines, implanting and recommendations) appear among the words that co-occur more strongly with cardiovascular disease among questions tabled by MPs from both immigrant- origin categories (I.O. white and BAME). This indicates that this more ‘proactive’ approach to cardiovascular disease is more prevalent among MPs from an immigrant background and that non-white ethnicity may not be as important as immigrant-origin heritage when it comes to addressing cardiovascular disease and its associated risk factors. As discussed briefly above, this has been influenced somewhat by immigrant-origin MPs tabling a disproportionately large number of questions in which ‘cardiovascular disease’ feature. In the case of I.O. white MPs, this is influenced by Chris Ruane while among BAME MPs this is driven by Virendra Sharma and Diane Abbott (Lab, Hackney North & Stoke Newington).

Table 5. 2. Collocates for cardiovascular disease in questions tabled by white British, I.O. white & BAME MPs White British respiratory, outcomes, newham, mortality, suffering, diagnosis, strategy, died, 65, recorded I.O. White protein, infectious, diets, outcomes, strategy, implementing, commissioning, groups, high, rates BAME dementia, fibrillation, factors, consumer, prevalence, outcomes, diagnosed, guidelines, implanting, recommendations

In Tables 5.3 and 5.4 below, the above exercise has been repeated, although this time ‘mental health’ has been used as the search term. In the first of which, collocates for mental

129 health are presented in questions tabled by native and immigrant-origin MPs. As can be observed, words commonly associated with mental health appear in both sets of collocates, such as ‘disorders’, ‘problems’ and ‘well-being’. Meanwhile, ‘1983’, on the other hand, which seems to be something of an anomaly in the lists presented in these tables, refers to the Mental Health Act of that year.

Table 5. 3. Collocates for mental health in questions tabled by Native & I.O. MPs Native adolescent, stigma, 1983, perinatal, problems, disorders, beds, well- being, suffering, detained Immigrant-origin adolescent, disorders, 1983, problems, difficulties, veterans, condition, diagnosed, well-being, conditions

In the final stage of the collocate analysis, questions were disaggregated by the ethnicity of the MP who submitted them. Once again, it is noted that there are few differences in the types of words and language used in relation to mental health; terms such as disorders and problems are present in questions from a white British, I.O. white or BAME background. Where there is a difference, however, is that the words ‘strategy’, ‘services’ and ‘treatment’ appear in the BAME list while these words and similar words are absent in the lists for white British and I.O. white Members. Once again, this might suggest that minority ethnic MPs have taken a more ‘proactive’ approach to address mental health than their white parliamentary colleagues. However, closer examination of the MPs who tabled these particular questions suggests that these findings could be due to a minority of BAME MPs submitting a relatively large number of questions in which ‘mental health’ appear. 39

Table 5. 4. Collocates for mental health in questions tabled by White British, I.O. White & BAME MPs White British adolescent, stigma, 1983, perinatal, problems, disorders, beds, well- being, suffering, problem I.O. White adolescent, disorders, problems, condition, veterans, conditions, physical, diagnosed, issues, well-being BAME 1983, disorders, problems, difficulties, diagnosed, issues, strategy, services, conditions, treatment

39 These MPs were Chi Onwurah (Lab, Newcastle upon Tyne Central) Chuka Umunna (Lab, Streatham) Sadiq Khan (Lab, Tooting) Rehman Chishti (Con, Gillingham & Rainham) & Diane Abbott.

130

What the above data demonstrate is that the types of words and language used by MPs when referring to matters relating to cardiovascular disease and mental health in their parliamentary questions do not greatly differ depending on whether or not they come from an immigrant background or whether they belong to a different ethnic group. Hence, it is difficult to make assessments as to whether immigrant-origin MPs were, from using this device to analyse the text of questions that these MPs submitted, more likely to have substantively represented the interests of the immigrant-origin population in relation to CVD and mental ill- health.

Were immigrant-origin MPs more likely to table questions in the interests of I.O. individuals?

This section of the chapter investigates how likely immigrant-origin MPs were to have tabled more questions related to cardiovascular disease and mental health. It initially details the types of variables used in the regression analyses before presenting and discussing the results in the regression models.

Dependent Variables

In the regression analyses that follow, three different count dependent variables are used. The first, which is referred to as I.O. Health was created by assigning to each MP the number of questions that they submitted during the 2010-15 Parliament that pertained to either or both cardiovascular disease and mental health conditions. To create this variable, the process outlined in the Methods chapter was adopted, whereby a series of search terms were used to identify questions relating to either or both CVD and mental health conditions. These were then coded depending on whether or not the question was considered to relate sufficiently to either or both of these two broad conditions. The chapter’s two secondary dependent variables, which are referred to as CVD and Mental Health, were created using an identical approach; however, this time using search terms relating specifically to cardiovascular disease and mental health respectively. Examples of questions which were deemed to demonstrate substantive representation in regard to CVD and Mental Health are included below. Meanwhile, Tables A2.1 and A2.2 found later in Appendix II contain lists of all search terms which were used to identify questions that related to CVD and Mental Health respectively.

131

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what plans he has to introduce a national cardiovascular patient experience survey.

- Andrew Gwynne (Lab, Denton & Reddish) 9/3/2012

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps his department is taking to address local variations in the quality of care for diabetes patients.

- Virendra Sharma (Lab, Ealing, Southall) 11/3/2015

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what his policy is on the provision of assistance for those with mental illness; and if he will make a statement.

- Bob Russell (Lib Dem, Colchester) 3/6/2010

To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people in the London Borough of Bexley were diagnosed with depression in the most recent period for which figures are available.

- David Evennett (Con, Bexleyheath & Crayford) 21/5/2012

As mentioned previously, the decision was made to examine CVD and Mental Health separately because cardiovascular disease and its risk factors require different types of attention and treatment than mental health conditions. Hence, it is quite possible that certain MPs will be more willing to highlight one as opposed to the other in their parliamentary questions. In Table 5.5 below, a set of descriptive statistics concerning the number of questions tabled by MPs addressing I.O. Health, CVD and Mental Health are presented. These are broken down in two ways; firstly, by the number and proportion of questions relating to these dependent variables that were tabled by I.O. and native British MPs and secondly, by the number and proportion of questions pertaining to these dependent variables that were submitted by white and BAME MPs. It shows that a total of 2,515 questions were submitted that were judged to relate to I.O. Health while 1,151 and 1,383 questions were submitted that addressed CVD and Mental Health respectively. Moreover, the chi-square tests included in Table 5.5 reveal statistically significant associations between both of these dependent variables and the binary I.O. MP and BAME MP independent variables.

132

Table 5. 5. I.O. Health, CVD & Mental Health-related questions – total numbers and column percentages Other Question Questions explicitly Total related to CVD and / or Mental Health

Native MP 156,381 (82.72%) 1,811 (72.01%) 158,192 (82.58%) I.O. MP 32,657 (17.28%) 704 (27.99%) 33,361 (17.42%) Total 189,038 (100.00%) 2,515 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00) Pearson chi ² = 198.19 p = 0.00 Other Question Questions explicitly Total related to CVD Native MP 157,355 (82.64%) 837 (72.72%) 158,192 (82.58%) I.O. MP 33,047 (17.36%) 314 (27.28%) 33,361 (17.42%) Total 190,402 (100.00) 1,151 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00%) Pearson chi ² = 78.34 p = 0.00 Other Question Questions explicitly Total related to Mental Health Native MP 157,208 (82.67%) 984 (71.15%) 158,192 (82.58%) I.O. MP 32,962 (17.33%) 399 (28.85%) 33,361 (17.42%) Total 190,170 (100.00%) 1,383 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00%) Pearson chi ² = 126.63 p = 0.00 Other Question Questions explicitly Total related to CVD and / or Mental Health White MP 174,920 (92.53%) 2,156 (85.73%) 177,076 (92.44%) BAME MP 14,118 (7.47%) 359 (14.27%) 14,477 (7.56%) Total 189,038 (100.00%) 2,515 (100.00) 191,553 (100.00%) Pearson chi ² = 164.56 p = 0.00 Other Question Questions explicitly Total related to CVD White MP 176,146 (92.51%) 930 (80.80%) 177,076 (92.44%) BAME MP 14,256 (7.49) 221 (19.20%) 14,477 (7.56%) Total 190,402 (100.00%) 1,151 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00%) Pearson chi ² = 224.68 p = 0.00 Other Question Questions explicitly Total related to Mental Health White MP 175,832 (92.46%) 1,244 (89.95) 177,076 (92.44%) BAME MP 14,338 (7.54%) 139 (10.05%) 14,477 (7.56%) Total 190,170 (100.00%) 1,383 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00%) Pearson chi ² = 12.39 p = 0.00 Source: Author’s own.

133

Independent & Control Variables

In addition to using some of the independent variables detailed in Chapter 3 that are used in both this and in subsequent chapters, this chapter adopts a number of independent variables that are unique to this chapter. A full list of these variables is included below in Table 5.6 along with some descriptive statistics. As the table shows, this is mainly a list of variables that seek to ascertain the extent to which local factors had an effect on the tabling of questions relating to CVD and or mental health conditions.

These have been considered because there are potentially a number of ways by which MPs might assess the health interests of their constituents. The first of these codes each MP with the proportion of people residing in their constituency who reported that their health was ‘bad’ or ‘very bad’ in the 2011 Census. The next variable, Percentage of constituents over the age of 65, has been included because a constituency with a higher than average elderly population could be regarded by MPs and their staff as being less healthy due to the higher incidence of medical conditions which occur in old age, including cardiovascular problems. As a result, each MP has been coded with the percentage of residents who were recorded as being aged 65 or over at the time of the 2011 Census.

Similarly, high levels of social deprivation may also indicate to MPs that a larger proportion of residents suffer from, or are at a heightened risk of developing ill-health and so their health interests require greater attention. Data of social deprivation are available for English, Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish authorities; however, criteria differ in each part of the UK and much of these data are not available at the constituency level. Therefore, the third and final health-related variable assigns to each MP the proportion of dependent children under the age of 20 who were living in poverty according to government statistics gathered in 2012.

Lastly, the Relevant Experience/Knowledge dummy variable observes MPs with relevant experience or knowledge of health and healthcare (0=no, 1=yes). This includes MPs who, prior to entering Parliament, worked in a profession such as medicine and or who were members of the Health and Social Care Committee and or various APPGs associated with health, such the APPGs on Heart Disease and Mental Health, for instance. Additionally, this chapter uses three control variables that are unique to this chapter. These note the number of questions that each MP submitted during the 2010-15 Parliament that did not relate to I.O. Health, CVD and Mental Health respectively.

134

Table 5. 6. Independent & Control Variables (Descriptive Statistics) Variable N Mean Standard Minimum Maximum Deviation

Relevant 669 0.08 0.27 0 1 Experience/Knowledge (dummy)

%Constituents 669 5.73 1.64 2.4 11.6 reporting poor health

%Constituents over 65 669 16.66 4.06 5.5 32.2

%Dependent children 669 18.38 7.48 4.8 42.2 under 20 living in poverty

Questions not relating 669 282.91 395.10 0 3814 to I.O. Health

Questions not relating 669 284.93 399.80 0 3975 to CVD

Questions not relating 669 284.58 397.89 0 3876 to Mental Health Source: Author’s own.

Results

The outputs for the first set of regression models, which use I.O. Health as the dependent variable, are presented below in Table 5.7. As it was found that this dependent variable is an overdispersed count variable, negative binomial regression has been employed in each of these models.

The first model, (Model 1a), consists of the immigrant-origin MP dummy variable along with the three control variables and serves as a baseline model. It suggests that immigrant-origin MPs were more likely to submit questions pertaining to I.O. Health than native British MPs, although this result is not statistically significant. However, in the second model (Model 1b), this picture alters somewhat and an inverse relationship with the dependent variable is observed which is significant at five per cent. In addition, Model 1b demonstrates that ethnic minority MPs were considerably more inclined to table questions pertaining to I.O. Health than white MPs (IRR = 4.70 p = <0.01), thus demonstrating a direct relationship between non-European ethnicity and the tabling of higher numbers of questions relating to either or both cardiovascular disease and mental health conditions. This second result supports the

135 second hypothesis (H2) outlined above which predicts that having non-European heritage would be a stronger determinant of whether or not MPs would submit questions of this nature. Moreover, the association between membership of the Parliamentary Labour Party and I.O. Health was found to have been negative, indicating that Labour MPs were less likely than MPs of other parties to table questions that related to I.O. Health. However, this result was only significant at the ten per cent level.

The final model (1c) also finds that immigrant-origin MPs were less likely to submit questions pertaining to I.O. Health. In Model 1c, however, this particular result can be stated with greater certainty as it is significant at five per cent. Similarly, Model 1c demonstrates that Labour MPs were, in fact, less inclined to submit questions relating to I.O. Health than MPs belonging to other parties (IRR = 0.67 p = <0.05). The relationship between non-European ethnicity and the dependent variable is weaker than in model 1b but nonetheless remains strong and statistically significant. Likewise, a strong association is noted between the dependent variable and Relevant Experience/Knowledge.

In contrast, the levels of ‘cosmopolitanism’ in a parliamentary constituency appeared to have had no effect on whether the MP representing the seat would table more questions addressing I.O. Health, as evidenced by the result for the Constituency Cosmopolitanism variable. However, this result, as noted in Table 5.7, was not found to be statistically significant. Marginality, a variable which registers the size of each MP’s electoral majority also recorded a near-identical result in this model. Similarly, the group of constituency or ‘local factor’ variables that were included (proportion of constituents self-reporting poor health, the proportion of constituents over the age of 65 and the proportion of dependent children in each constituency living in poverty) were mainly found to have registered non- existent relationships with the I.O. Health dependent variable. That being said, of this group of variables, only the result for the constituency age profile variable was found to be statistically significant (p = <0.01).

136

Table 5. 7. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to I.O. Health Dependent Variable I.O. Health I.O. Health I.O. Health Model 1a Model 1b Model 1c Independent Variables

Immigrant-origin MP 1.13 (0.28) 0.55 (0.13) ** 0.56 (0.13) ** (dummy)

BAME MP (dummy) 4.70 (1.64) *** 3.56 (1.29) ***

Labour MP (dummy) 0.72 (0.13) * 0.67 (0.13) **

Relevant 2.86 (0.96) *** Experience/Knowledge (dummy)

Constituency 1.00 (0.01) Cosmopolitanism

% Constituents self- 1.12 (0.12) reporting poor health

% Constituents over the 0.92 (0.03) *** age of 65

% Dependent children 0.98 (0.02) in constituency living in poverty

Marginality 0.99 (0.01)

Qs not relating to I.O. 1.00 (0.00) *** 1.00 (0.00) *** 1.00 (0.00) *** Health

Ministerial Service 0.99 (0.01) 0.99 (0.01) 0.99 (0.01) * (months)

Service in 2010-15 1.01 (0.01) 1.01 (0.01) 1.01 (0.01) Parliament (months) Constant 0.48 (0.28) 0.60 (0.36) 2.30 (2.16) McFadden’s r² 0.08 0.09 0.09 N 669 669 669 *p<0.1 **p<0.05 ***p<0.01 Incidence Rate Ratios (robust standard errors clustered around Name of MP in brackets).

Next, further models were created that used CVD as their dependent variable. Like I.O. Health dependent variable, CVD is also an overdispersed count variable and so negative binomial regression has once again been employed in each of these models.

137

The first of this second set of models (Model 2a) includes the immigrant-origin MP dummy variable alongside three control variables and serves, like its earlier equivalent (Model 1a), as a baseline model. It notes a modest positive, but statistically insignificant association between having immigrant-origin heritage and CVD. Turning to the second model (2b), it is observed that immigrant-origin MPs were less likely to table CVD-related questions than native British MPs. This result is statistically significant, but only at the ten per cent level (IRR = 0.48 p = <0.1). In contrast, the model finds that BAME Members were almost seven times more likely than white MPs to submit CVD-related questions than white MPs (IRR = 6.73 p =<0.01), thus lending strong support to the second hypothesis (H2), which predicts that having non-European ancestry would be a more important determinant that an MP will table a higher quantity of questions addressing cardiovascular disease. Conversely, the incidence rate for Labour MPs is negative, although statistically insignificant.

Finally, Model 2c produces a set of results similar to those displayed earlier in Model 1c. Firstly, it is observed that immigrant-origin MPs and Labour Party MPs were less likely to have tabled questions pertaining to CVD. Ethnic minority MPs, however, once again showed a much greater tendency to submit questions addressing this health condition than white MPs. MPs with relevant experience or knowledge on matters to do with health and healthcare also exhibited a higher inclination to table questions. Meanwhile, the constituency health factor variables mainly exhibit neutral or modest negative associations with the dependent variable. However, MPs representing constituencies where a higher proportion of residents self-report poor health were moderately more inclined to submit questions addressing cardiovascular disease (IRR = 1.35 p = <0.05). Interestingly, the relationship between constituency age profile and questions addressing CVD is moderately negative, demonstrating that the likelihood of submitting these types of questions decreases slightly in constituencies where older residents account for a larger proportion of the population. Lastly, the size of MPs’ electoral majorities had no effect on the dependent variable in this model, as shown by the Marginality variable. However, this specific result is not statistically significant.

138

Table 5. 8. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to CVD Dependent Variable CVD CVD CVD Model 2a Model 2b Model 2c Independent Variables

Immigrant-origin MP 1.28 (0.47) 0.48 (0.19) * 0.50 (0.17) ** (dummy)

BAME MP (dummy) 6.73 (3.67) *** 6.03 (3.25) ***

Labour MP (dummy) 0.71 (0.18) 0.56 (0.15) **

Relevant 3.18 (1.17) *** Experience/Knowledge (dummy)

Constituency 0.99 (0.01) Cosmopolitanism

% Constituents self- 1.35 (0.17) ** reporting poor health

% Constituents over the 0.86 (0.04) *** age of 65

% Dependent children 0.93 (0.03) ** in constituency living in poverty

Marginality 0.99 (0.01)

Qs not relating to CVD 1.00 (0.00) *** 1.00 (0.00) *** 1.00 (0.00) ***

Ministerial Service 0.99 (0.01) 0.98 (0.01) ** 0.99 (0.01) (months)

Service in 2010-15 1.01 (0.02) 1.01 (0.02) 1.01 (0.02) Parliament (months) Constant 0.19 (0.18) * 0.25 (0.26) 3.48 (5.13) McFadden’s r² 0.08 0.09 0.09 N 669 669 669 *p<0.1 **p<0.05 ***p<0.01 Incidence Rate Ratios (robust standard errors clustered around Name of MP in brackets).

The final set of regression models that feature in this chapter are displayed in Table 5.9. Each of these models uses Mental Health as their dependent variable. Mental Health is also

139 an overdispersed count variable and so negative binomial regression is once again the appropriate form of analysis.

The first of these models, Model 3a, acts as the baseline model. It finds a more or less neutral association between immigrant-origin heritage and the submission of questions addressing mental health issues although this result is not, as the model notes, statistically significant. Model 3b includes the BAME MP and Labour MP binary variables. In this model, we can observe an inverse, although statistically insignificant association between immigrant heritage and the tabling of questions addressing mental health. Having non-white heritage was, however, found to have been a strong predictor that an MP will have tabled questions addressing mental health conditions (IRR = 3.29 p <0.01). The result for the binary Labour MP variable indicates that Labour Members demonstrated a lower tendency to table questions addressing mental health conditions than MPs from other parties, although this result is not statistically significant.

The final model (3c) differs from the other models included in Table 5.9 insofar as the variable noting the proportion of constituents over 65 in each constituency has not been included. This is because unlike cardiovascular disease, which is more prevalent among middle and older age cohorts, mental health issues are not known to affect one or certain age groups in particular and so it is reasoned that an MP will not use the age profile of their constituents as a means to determine or assess the health interests of their constituents. The results from this model suggest that the association between immigrant heritage and questions relating to mental health was negative, although this was not found to have been statistically significant. BAME Members again showed a greater likelihood to table questions on the subject of mental health compared to white Members, a finding that is statistically significant at five per cent. Similarly, MPs with relevant experience or knowledge recorded a greater likelihood of submitting such questions (IRR = 2.57 p <0.05) than MPs without. Lastly, Model 3c also shows that the three continuous constituency factor variables and Marginality each have virtually neutral associations with the dependent variable, once again suggesting that MPs are not influenced by constituency factors or the size of their electoral majority when submitting questions addressing mental health issues. That being said, none of these latter four results is statistically significant.

140

Table 5. 9. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to Mental Health Dependent Variable Mental Health Mental Health Model Mental Health Model Model 3a 3b 3c Independent Variables

Immigrant-origin MP 1.04 (0.23) 0.62 (0.19) 0.67 (0.21) (dummy)

BAME MP (dummy) 3.29 (1.18) *** 2.59 (1.06) **

Labour MP (dummy) 0.76 (0.16) 0.79 (0.21)

Relevant 2.57 (1.09) ** Experience/Knowledge (dummy)

Constituency 1.01 (0.01) Cosmopolitanism

% Constituents self- 0.92 (0.11) reporting poor health

% Dependent children 1.03 (0.02) in constituency living in poverty

Marginality 0.99 (0.01)

Qs not relating to 1.00 (0.00) *** 1.00 (0.00) *** 1.00 (0.00) *** Mental Health

Ministerial Service 1.00 (0.01) 0.99 (0.01) 0.99 (0.01) (months)

Service in 2010-15 1.01 (0.01) 1.01 (0.01) 1.01 (0.01) Parliament (months) Constant 0.31 (0.19) * 0.36 (0.22) * 0.37 (0.28) McFadden’s r² 0.09 0.09 0.10 N 669 669 669 *p<0.1 **p<0.05 ***p<0.01 Incidence Rate Ratios (robust standard errors clustered around Name of MP in brackets).

Discussion

As outlined earlier, the normative political representation literature contends that descriptive representatives can better be relied upon to substantively represent the interests and concerns of politically underrepresented minority groups than non-descriptive

141 representatives. That being said, this chapter has presented data that challenges this particular normative narrative. Namely, it documents that there was an inverse association between having non-British, immigrant heritage and the tabling of questions relating to either or both cardiovascular disease and mental ill-health during the 2010-15 Parliament. This pattern is again observable when questions pertaining to cardiovascular disease and mental health are disaggregated, as shown in Tables 5.8 and 5.9. However, ethnic minority MPs, who as mentioned earlier, overwhelmingly qualify as immigrant-origin, were more inclined to table questions pertaining to the I.O. Health dependent variable in addition to the disaggregated CVD and Mental Health dependent variables than white MPs. These findings demonstrate that this subsection of immigrant-origin MPs substantively represented the health interests of immigrant-origin members of the public in regard to both CVD and mental health to a greater extent than white MPs.

BAME MPs’ greater tendency to submit substantially more parliamentary questions pertaining to CVD than white MPs is one of the most noteworthy findings of this chapter. This may be due to the presence, as theorised earlier, of group consciousness among BAME MPs that encourages these MPs to substantively represent issues that are in the interests of ethnic minorities (Nixon, 1998; Sobolewska, McKee & Campbell, 2018). What is also interesting is that, while BAME Members were still twice as likely to submit questions relating to mental health issues than white MPs, their willingness to submit questions relating to CVD and its risk factors did not extend to mental health to quite the same extent. This could be attributed to the fact that a higher number of MPs, irrespective of their ethnicity, may choose to prioritise physical health conditions such as cardiovascular disease and cancer at the expense of mental health conditions in their work as elected representatives as both of these are among the biggest causes of mortality in the country. Consequently, they are considered to be worthy of greater attention from policymakers.

A possible explanation for this could be that while African or Asian ethnicity is established as a risk factor of cardiovascular disease, there is, conversely, no documented direct link between non-white ethnicity and the risk of developing mental health problems. Hence, ethnic minority MPs do not regard mental ill-health as an ethnic minority ‘issue’ per se and so consequently feel less motivated to substantively represent this issue. A second possible explanation for this finding may be due to a lack of knowledge or understanding among MPs of mental health issues and their implications due to a lack of open discussion on the subject. Therefore, these issues fail to reach legislators and other policymakers. As a consequence, legislators are less inclined to take steps to substantively represent this issue in Parliament.

Moreover, in certain cultures, a number of cultural, religious and spiritual reasons may prevent individuals from gaining further assistance as mental ill-health is considered to be

142 part of ‘divine design’ and one’s own destiny. In addition, an emphasis on projecting stoicism and ‘staying strong’ when experiencing symptoms of postnatal and or perinatal depression was highlighted among foreign-born and or mothers from a minority ethnic background (Edge, Baker & Rogers, 2004).

Qualitative research, for instance, has observed hesitancy or even a reluctance to seek professional help and treatment for mental health conditions within the British Asian Muslim community because of concerns about stigma and shame (Anand & Cochrane, 2005). Instead, there is a greater reliance on family members, community figures and personal prayer to provide help and support. This has been attributed to what has been termed the ‘collectivist’ nature of Muslim culture which researchers have observed within different societies wherein religion is integrated into treatment and there is a general perception is that mental health is a family matter (Al-Darmaki, 2003; Aloud & Rathur, 2009).

Furthermore, accessing medical services may also prove difficult for newcomers from a variety of backgrounds into British society due to a lack of knowledge about the British healthcare system and possible language barriers (Lindert et al., 2008). As a consequence of these factors, MPs and other policymakers may lack a comprehensive understanding of mental ill-health within immigrant-origin communities. In addition, the results also indicate that a variety of constituency factors which could be used by MPs to assess the health interests of their constituents did not increase the likelihood that MPs put forward parliamentary questions to ministers addressing mental health conditions.

This latter finding differs from prior research, which finds that MPs’ greater likelihood of tabling questions addressing minority issues is linked to the ethnic composition of their constituencies (Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013). This indicates that on these more specific immigrant and or ethnic minority issues, constituency factors appear to have a negligible impact on the likelihood of MPs tabling questions. A possible explanation for this could be that questions about diversity and immigration to the UK are issues that are more specific to minority groups, whereas cardiovascular disease and poor mental health are not, by contrast, specific to one segment(s) of society. Therefore, MPs may be less likely to prioritise these issues through their parliamentary questions and instead devote greater attention to more constituency-specific issues and concerns.

To conclude this section, it is important to highlight what is a limitation of this study’s research design. Namely, our understanding of the health interests of the immigrant-origin population is largely based on research examining BAME individuals in addition to the British-Irish community, who, as documented above, have been found to be at greater risk of developing cardiovascular disease and mental health problems. Research examining the

143 health of minority white groups remains limited and so it is more difficult to ascertain the possible health interests of other white minority groups, such British citizens and residents who are of Eastern European origin.

Conclusion

The primary objective of this chapter has been to empirically examine whether or not immigrant-origin British Members of Parliament demonstrated a greater likelihood of substantively representing the health interests of the British immigrant-origin population during the 2010-15 Parliament. However, as health and healthcare are large and wide- ranging policy areas, the decision was made to focus on two specific yet broad health conditions where empirical research has observed disparities between the native and immigrant-origin populations: cardiovascular disease and mental health. By doing so, this chapter and the three that follow expand ways in which researchers quantify substantive representation of minority communities’ interests in the British House of Commons by advocating a departure from focusing on policy areas and issues which are regarded as specific to ethnic minorities and or immigrants.

The findings presented earlier in the chapter demonstrate that immigrant-origin MPs were less inclined than their native British counterparts to table questions relating to either or both cardiovascular disease and mental health. This pattern is again observed when CVD and mental health are analysed separately, as illustrated in Tables 5.8 and 5.9. Belonging to a minority ethnic group was, however, found to be a very strong predictor that an MP would submit a higher number of questions addressing cardiovascular disease as BAME parliamentarians demonstrated a greater likelihood to highlight this condition and its risk factors in their parliamentary questions. BAME MPs’ greater willingness to table questions addressing CVD also extended, albeit to a lesser extent, to mental health.

In summary, analysis of parliamentary questions for written answer submitted during the 2010-15 Parliament reveals that immigrant-origin MPs showed a lower tendency to substantively represent the interests of immigrant-origin members of the British public in relation to CVD and mental health. This challenges the assumption that the interests of minority groups stand a greater chance of being substantively represented by descriptive representatives. However, as mentioned at different intervals throughout the thesis, ethnic minority Members, who almost entirely qualify as immigrant-origin by the definition used in this thesis, were more likely to have tabled questions relating to these two health conditions.

144

This demonstrates that a subsection of MPs from a recent immigrant family background was more inclined to substantively represent these particular immigrant-origin health interests.

In closing this chapter, it is important to consider what these findings could mean for representation in the House of Commons in years to come, especially if the House continues on its current trend and becomes more ethnically and racially diverse in future years. One possible outcome is that cardiovascular disease and mental health will become more prominent in parliamentary proceedings. As has been discussed previously in this dissertation, support for increasing the descriptive representation of societal groups that have been traditionally underrepresented or excluded from elected office is, aside from symbolic reasons, often championed because it is believed that their increased presence will improve the substantive representation of individuals whom they descriptively represent (Phillips, 1998).

Yet, the data presented in this chapter indicates that by improving the promotion and representation of cardiovascular disease and mental health conditions and possibly other health conditions that are relevant to immigrant-origin individuals will not necessarily be achieved by electing more immigrant-origin MPs to Westminster. That being said, the increased representation in the Commons of a sub-section of immigrant-origin MPs; namely, parliamentarians of ethnic minority origin could lead to the health interests of the I.O. population being substantively represented to a greater extent on the basis of the findings presented in this chapter.

The following three chapters will continue in more or less the same vein as this chapter by focusing on different issues and policy areas listed previously.

145

Chapter 6. Evidence of Substantive Representation in Different Policy Areas: Prejudice and Discrimination 40

The second of this dissertation’s policy area chapters examines the extent to which immigrant-origin MPs substantively represented the interests of immigrant-origin individuals in relation to prejudice and discrimination during the 2010-15 Parliament. As introduced earlier, certain types of prejudice are more likely to predominantly or disproportionately affect individuals from an immigrant background in the United Kingdom; in particular, different forms of ethnic, racial and religious prejudice and discrimination. In areas such as the labour market, for instance, empirical research has found evidence that similarly qualified immigrants and individuals from an immigrant family background are more likely to be overlooked in favour of their native British counterparts when applying for jobs (Currie, 2007; Heath & Cheung, 2007; Khattab & Fox, 2016). Furthermore, other research concludes that immigrant-origin individuals encounter similar discrimination when trying to secure accommodation (Carlsson & Eriksson, 2015).

The highlighting of matters relating to prejudice and more specifically the reduction of prejudice are issues which are clearly in the interests of immigrant-origin individuals. Therefore, if the assumption made both inside and outside of normative literature are correct (see, e.g., Dovi, 2002; Mansbridge, 1999, 2003), we would expect to find that immigrant- origin MPs will have been more inclined to have made efforts to address, combat and raise issues concerning the effects of prejudice than indigenous British MPs. The first objective of this chapter is to empirically test whether this has indeed been the case.

In addition, this chapter also seeks to build on existing research that has investigated the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation by examining MPs’ responsiveness to other types of prejudice, such as sexism and homophobia. By doing so, this chapter pursues a line of enquiry that has hitherto been an unexplored area of research. To date, research has yet to be conducted into whether MPs from a minority ethnic and or immigrant background are more likely than native British MPs to highlight forms of prejudice that predominantly or exclusively affect other groups which have been traditionally

40 An earlier version of this chapter was presented as a conference paper (‘Does Heritage Matter? Immigrant- Origin British MPs and the Submission of Parliamentary Questions Addressing Prejudice During the 2010-15 Parliament’) at both the PSA 68th Annual International Conference in Cardiff, 26-28 March 2018 and the 76th Annual MPSA Conference in Chicago, 5-8 April 2018.

146 descriptively underrepresented among elected officeholders such as women, LGBT individuals and those with mental or physical disabilities.

Hence, this chapter additionally examines whether immigrant-origin MPs also exhibited signs of what the thesis refers to as an ‘inter’ or ‘cross-group’ solidarity or consciousness which encourages these MPs to address forms of prejudice that other politically underrepresented groups; chiefly, women, sexual minorities and the disabled encounter. This aspect of the chapter is loosely based on and inspired by the discussion on surrogate representatives found within the works of Mansbridge (1999, 2003 & 2011). As outlined in Chapter 2, the term surrogate representatives is used by Mansbridge to describe legislators who seek to substantively represent individuals who reside outside of their constituencies, often due to solidarity with citizens with whom they share certain characteristics, such as race, irrespective of where they happen to reside. By including this second enquiry, this thesis seeks to provide a preliminary exploration of the concept of ‘cross-group’ consciousness. This thesis never intended to evaluate or extensively study this concept; however, it is included in this thesis as it was deemed to be an interesting concept and one which might constitute a basis for future research, as discussed later in the Conclusion chapter. This could involve an investigation into MPs’ attitudes to these other aforementioned types of prejudice.

The results from the chapter’s ‘first’ line of enquiry found that there was no relationship between immigrant heritage and the submission of questions pertaining to ethnic, racial and religious prejudice. Results from the ‘second’ line of enquiry, however, find that ethnic minority MPs were, in one of the regression models, considerably more likely to submit questions to ministers that addressed these other types of prejudice. In addition, this chapter finds that female MPs were more inclined to submit questions of this nature.

The rest of this chapter is structured as follows: it continues by outlining its hypotheses. This is followed by a section summarising the research design. Meanwhile, the latter half of the chapter is devoted to the presentation and discussion of the results of both of the aforementioned lines of enquiry.

Hypotheses

This chapter employs a set of hypotheses which, apart from a few minor differences, are broadly similar to those which are outlined in the Methods chapter and have been employed in other chapters. The first hypothesis (see below) has been adopted because empirical

147 research has demonstrated evidence of a link between descriptive and substantive representation among minority and or politically underrepresented groups.

Although research examining evidence of something resembling an ‘inter’ or ‘cross’ group consciousness among minority communities is minimal, McKee (2017), does, however, observe evidence of this among British parliamentary candidates. In addition, older American research noted that African-American women were more inclined to support feminist positions and organisations (Wilcox, 1990). Similarly, G. Lewis (2003) found that black Americans registered more support for anti-gay discrimination laws. While this body of research is small, it provides an indicator that immigrant-origin MPs may have sought to substantively represent the interests of other underrepresented groups. Consequently, the first hypothesis is as follows:

H1: Immigrant-origin MPs were more inclined to table questions addressing both prejudice directed at I.O. individuals and prejudice targeted at other underrepresented groups than native British parliamentarians.

The second hypothesis, meanwhile, is based on the premise that BAME Members will have been more likely to have substantively represented the interests of I.O. individuals in relation to prejudice and discrimination. Firstly, this is in part due to the fact that survey data has illustrated that white Britons and ethnic minorities differ considerably in their attitudes towards equal opportunities and the role the state should play in ensuring that there is more of a ‘level playing field’ for ethnic minorities in terms of access to opportunities. Data from the 2010 British Election Study (BES) and the Ethnic Minority British Election Survey (EMBES) reveal that a large number of ethnic minority individuals believe that government should ‘do more’ to improve opportunities for black and Asian people, as opposed to just 20 per cent of white people (Heath et al., 2013). Furthermore, white Britons almost unanimously opposed race-based affirmative action or positive discrimination in the labour market; conversely, almost one-third of ethnic minorities believed that individuals from a minority ethnic background ought to be given priority when applying for jobs (Ibid).

In addition, as the Theory chapter also explores, the concepts of group consciousness and linked fate may lead MPs to substantively represent the interests of immigrant-origin members of the British public. Researchers have been sceptical about the endurance of group consciousness among immigrant white communities beyond the first generation owing to the belief that these individuals are quickly ‘absorbed’ into the host society after one generation (see, e.g., Chong & Rogers, 2005; Sobolewska, 2017). Therefore, the motivation

148 to represent individuals’ concerns about ethnic prejudice may not be as apparent, or as strongly apparent, among white immigrant-origin MPs as racial or ethnic discrimination is not thought to affect immigrant or I.O. white individuals to nearly the same extent, if at all.

As a consequence, white MPs from an immigrant background may not consider it an issue that ought to be highlighted and represented. Their decision not to represent this issue may be due to the fact that significant political movements have not mobilised against the settlement of white immigrants and that opposition to white migrants, especially Australians, has been much lower among the general public than it has been towards non-white migrants from the Caribbean and the Indian Subcontinent (Ford, 2011; Ford, Jennings & Somerville, 2015;).

Hence, these findings indicate that there exists a ‘hierarchy’ of migrants that is based on how favourably they are viewed by the host population (see, e.g., Ford, 2011). While the experiences of previous (and current) generations of Irish, Jewish, and Eastern European migrants indicates that ‘whiteness’ does not necessarily shield them from the effects of discrimination (Fox, 2013; Fox, Morosanu & Szilassy, 2012). Their skin colour, however, could still be a marker of privilege, especially for later generations of European migrants. This is an ‘advantage’ that is not afforded to British-born ethnic minorities who remain distinct due to their physical appearance and or name (McDowell, 2009).

Looking abroad, there is reason to hypothesise that ethnic minority MPs at Westminster might have illustrated a greater tendency to substantively represent the interests of other disadvantaged groups in relation to discrimination, thus demonstrating what I refer to as ‘cross’ or ‘inter’ group consciousness. Black Americans, as outlined in the earlier discussion on H1, were found to be more supportive of laws prohibiting anti-gay discrimination (G. Lewis, 2003). Older surveys conducted in the United States have shown higher support for feminist positions and organisations among black women as opposed to white women. This has led to the suggestion that this stems from a hope that action will be taken to address discrimination against women will result in more collective or government action to address discrimination more widely (Wilcox, 1990).

How and whether this translates to Britons and influences and or shapes British legislators’ attitudes and behaviour is less clear. Certainly, social conservatism and a stronger commitment to traditional cultural and religious values have, relative to the white population, been observed among ethnic minorities in the UK (Saggar, 2000; Sobolewska, 2005). Yet, as noted earlier, legislators who come from these backgrounds may be more socially liberal and secular than many of those whom they descriptively represent (Dancygier, 2017). This

149 chapter expects to find that ethnic minority British MPs will be more likely than white MPs to highlight forms of discrimination that pertain to other underrepresented groups. The Representative Audit of Britain Survey of parliamentary candidates contesting the 2015 British general election, for instance, found that BAME candidates were more likely to strongly favour measures designed to improve the descriptive representation. These measures include support for a minimum number of candidates on shortlists and ‘all minority’ shortlists, not only for ethnic minorities but also other underrepresented groups as well, such as LGBT individuals, individuals from a working-class background and those with disabilities (McKee, 2017). This indicates that BAME MPs are willing to support other minority groups and the causes and interests which are of importance to these other minority and or underrepresented groups. The chapter’s second hypothesis is thus:

H2: During the 2010-15 Parliament, ethnic minority Members of Parliament were more likely to have submitted more questions relating to forms of prejudice and discrimination largely directed at I.O. individuals and other minority and or underrepresented groups than white MPs from both an immigrant and a non- immigrant family background.

The third and final hypothesis that this chapter investigates has been adopted because, as has again been documented in Chapter 2, individuals who subscribe to different political ideologies can sometimes have different approaches to race and ethnicity. These differences may, in turn, have a bearing on whether or not and how likely individuals are to prioritise issues relating to prejudice (Kilson, 2014; Ondaatje, 2011; Ray, 2009; Tran, 2016). While political conservatives and those on the right of the political spectrum have often exhibited a greater reluctance to use direct government action to combat forms of intolerance (Ondaatje, 2011), the political left has, conversely, criticised or rejected this approach by claiming that it overlooks forms of intolerance and fails to properly acknowledge certain privileges that are afforded to the majority racial and ethnic group(s) (Bonilla-Silva, 2006; Tran, 2016; Wildman, 1996). It is, therefore, reasoned that these contrasting approaches to addressing prejudice may be apparent among UK MPs who belong to parties of the centre-left and centre-right respectively. Moreover, the Labour Party has traditionally taken an interventionist approach to tackle discrimination through government action is in contrast to the Conservative Party, as evidenced by the larger role taken by the former to enact anti-discrimination legislation relating to race (Wintemute, 2016).

150

In addition, Labour has been responsible for other legislation that has sought to secure greater protections for other minority and or underrepresented groups, such as the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, the Equal Pay Act 1970 and the Equality Act 2010, the latter of which replaced the previous two pieces of legislation (Ibid.). Finally, turning to the issue ownership theory (see Petrocik, 1996) referenced in the previous chapter, Labour may likewise regard the curbing of different forms of discrimination as an issue which they have an advantage over rival parties owing to their record of initiating and enacting anti- discrimination legislation.

With these points in mind, this chapter not only predicts that Labour Party Members will have been more likely to have substantively represented the interests of immigrant-origin individuals in relation to prejudice, but also the interests of other minority and or underrepresented groups in regard to the forms of prejudice that these other groups experience.

H3: Members of Parliament who belong to the Labour Party were more likely to table questions relating to the types of prejudice directed at I.O. communities and to other forms of intolerance directed at women and other minority groups.

Prejudice

Prejudice has featured and continues to feature in the lives of many people in Britain who come from an immigrant background. The 2010 EMBES observed that large minorities of BAME respondents report having been a victim of discrimination at some point during their lifetime (Heath et al., 2013). White immigrants from other European countries, specifically former Communist states in Eastern and Central Europe, have been subject to prejudice, including racism, although research into direct discrimination against people from these countries remains underdeveloped (Burrell, 2010; Fox, 2013). Researchers have cited examples of racist incidents against and statistics concerning Eastern Europeans, in particular Poles, suggesting that this has been a growing problem over the past decade (Fox, Morosanu & Szilassy, 2015). The framing of Eastern Europeans in often dehumanising terms by the tabloid press and by various public figures has been viewed as contributing to a climate of opinion that is hostile to Eastern Europeans (Fox, Morosanu & Szilassy, 2012, 2015).

Research has documented examples of discrimination in regard to employment and housing. As discussed in the later chapter on the labour market, researchers have ascribed the well-

151 documented ‘gap’ in employment between white people and ethnic minorities as being due, when other factors such as age, qualifications and experience are taken into account, to racism and discrimination (Esmail & Everington, 1993; Heath & Cheung, 2007; Khattab & Fox, 2016). White immigrants to the country, similarly, face similar barriers when attempting to access employment when disparities in employment cannot be attributed to other, aforementioned factors (Currie, 2007). Similar studies have concluded that discrimination exists against immigrant-origin individuals who are seeking to rent property (Carlsson & Eriksson, 2015).

As mentioned towards the start of the chapter, this chapter examines how likely I.O. MPs were to have substantively represented two broad categories of prejudice in their parliamentary questions. The first of which is referred to in this chapter as I.O. Prejudice which encompasses all forms of intolerance that predominantly affect individuals of immigrant-origin, namely, racial and ethnic prejudice. In addition, religious intolerance is also included under this category; for example, Islamophobia and anti-Semitism, as many adherents of minority (i.e. non-Christian) faiths such as Hinduism, Sikhism and Judaism are from an immigrant background (Heath et al., 2013). The latter category, on the other hand, is entitled Other Prejudice. This incorporates forms of prejudice that are directed at other minority and or politically underrepresented groups, such as sexism, ableism in addition to the various types of prejudice directed at members of the LGBT community (homophobia, biphobia and transphobia).

How did MPs discuss discrimination in their parliamentary questions?

This chapter begins its analysis by exploring, as has been done in the preceding chapter and in the two chapters that follow, the types of words and language used by MPs in regard to the policy area covered in that specific chapter. In the case of this chapter, this involves examining the words that appear in close proximity to ‘discrimination’ and different forms of the word in the text of parliamentary questions.

In order to identify collocates that appear in the following tables (6.1 & 6.2), a stem word ‘discrim*’ (instead of ‘discrimination’) has been employed as the search word because it identifies instances when other similar words appear among the corpora of parliamentary questions, such as ‘discriminated’ and ‘discriminatory’. In the first example (Table 6.1), the ten words that co-occurred most powerfully with discrimination in questions tabled by both native and immigrant-origin MPs are listed. The two lists of collocates also reveal that both native and immigrant-origin MPs often adopted proactive and direct language, for instance ‘elimination’ in relation to discrimination in their parliamentary questions. Other collocates

152 illustrate that both native and I.O. MPs were interested in the recording and monitoring of such incidents as evidenced by the presence of words such as ‘lodged’, ‘reports’ and ‘cases’ in Table 6.1. However, what is noted is that the words used by both native and immigrant- origin MPs are fairly generic: ‘lodged’, ‘elimination’, ‘forms’ and ‘against’.

Indicators that I.O. MPs exhibited a greater likelihood of substantively representing the interests of I.O. communities can be seen by, first, the fact that ‘racial’ was the word that co- occurred most strongly with discrim* and second, by the fact that ‘Muslims’ co-occurs strongly with discrim* in questions submitted by immigrant-origin MPs. The former did not co-occur quite as strongly with discrim* in questions tabled by native MPs while ‘Muslims’ was not present among the ten words that were most closely associated with discrim* in these MPs’ parliamentary questions. That being said, ‘caste’ does, however, appear in the list for native MPs.

Similarly, there is little evidence, from these lists, that MPs from an immigrant background were more likely to substantively represent forms of discrimination that affect other ‘out- groups’ are also present among the words that appear close to discrimination within parliamentary questions. In questions tabled by native MPs, ‘transphobic’ and ‘homophobic’ co-occur strongly with discrimin*, while in questions originating from immigrant-origin MPs, ‘women’ appear in close proximity to the search word. Furthermore, a look at the I.O. MPs who tabled these questions reveals that, unlike in the previous chapter, a high proportion of questions containing ‘discrim*’ did not originate from a small group of I.O. MPs but instead came entirely from I.O. MPs who tabled between one and three questions. This indicates that these particular findings were not driven by a subset of immigrant-origin MPs to the same extent as in the preceding chapter.

Table 6. 1. Collocates for discrim* in questions tabled by Native & I.O. MPs Native transphobic, stigma, racial, caste, lodged, homophobic, elimination, harassment, signing, pregnancy Immigrant-origin racial, elimination, muslims, forms, against, reports, cases, all, women, taking

The second stage of this analysis, meanwhile, involved disaggregating questions depending on the ethnic background of the MP who tabled the question (Table 6.2). When doing so, we find that ‘racial’ co-occurs strongly with discrim* in questions tabled by white British and BAME Members. However, this word was not found to have been associated with discrim* to a great degree. Finally, when questions were disaggregated by ethnicity, we observe a

153 possible indicator that discrimination against Muslims is perhaps more of a concern for MPs from a minority ethnic background, as indicated by the presence of ‘Muslims’ among the collocate list found in Table 6.2. As questions cannot be traced back to a proportionally small number of BAME MPs, it is clear that this finding was not influenced by the questions of a relatively low number of BAME MPs. Rather, this finding can be attributed to a wider group of BAME submitting questions in which ‘discrim*’ features.

Table 6.2 also reveals that MPs belonging to different ethnic groups were inclined to make reference to types of discrimination directed at other disadvantaged groups in their parliamentary questions. ‘Transphobic’ and ‘homophobic’ appear in close proximity to the search word in questions asked by white British MPs. In questions tabled by BAME MPs, the words ‘stigma’, ‘gay’, ‘lesbian’ and ‘1979’, a reference to a convention focused on the elimination of female discrimination that took place in that year were among those that co- occurred strongly with discrim*. Among white immigrant-origin Members ‘left-handedness’ and ‘same-sex’ are present.

Table 6. 2. Collocates for discrim* in questions tabled by White British, I.O. White & BAME MPs White British transphobic, stigma, racial, caste, homophobic, lodged, elimination, harassment, signing, pregnancy I.O. White impartially, eweida, left-handedness, racial, ahmadiyya, nadia, same-sex, elimination, ethos, pursued BAME 1979, elimination, racial, stigma, persecution, gay, lesbian, muslims, defending, abuses

The collocates presented in the above sets of tables (6.1 and 6.2) suggests that MPs did not generally differ greatly from one another in the ways in which they make reference to matters relating to discrimination in their parliamentary questions. Consequently, it would be difficult to make assessments on whether immigrant-origin Members of Parliaments were more likely to have substantively represented the interests of both immigrant-origin individuals and members of other politically underrepresented groups from using this data.

Were immigrant-origin MPs more likely to table questions in the interests of I.O. individuals?

This section of the chapter investigates the likelihood that MPs from an immigrant background were more likely to have submitted questions addressing prejudice compared to

154 native British MPs. It first covers the variables used in the later regression analyses before presenting and discusses the results produced in these analyses.

Dependent Variables

In the regression analyses that follow, two count dependent variables are used. The first of these dependent variables include questions that explicitly relate to one or more of the types of prejudice categorised under I.O. Prejudice; and were identified using a search term dictionary that can be found, along with the other dictionaries used in this dissertation, in Appendix II. This particular dictionary was assembled with the aim of identifying the widest possible range of questions which pertain to I.O. Prejudice. These questions, as outlined in the Methods chapter, were selected on the basis that the question met at least one of the criteria outlined in this earlier chapter. Examples of these questions include the following:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what arrangements are in place to ensure that (a) political and (b) racial discrimination does not take place within the NHS.

- Daniel Poulter (Con, Central Suffolk and North Ipswich) 21/5/2012

To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what steps his department is taking to tackle anti-Semitic attacks (a) in Greater Manchester and (b) across the UK.

- Nigel Dodds (DUP, Belfast North) 22/7/2014

The second dependent variable includes questions that clearly address at least one of the forms of prejudice that are directed at other groups and so, therefore, comes under Other Prejudice. This variable was formed by repeating the same process as the first, the main difference being in the employment of different search terms (e.g., ‘sexism’). Questions that explicitly pertained to Other Prejudice were assigned the value of ‘1’. Once again, the criteria detailed in Chapter 3 were used to determine whether the question sufficiently demonstrated substantive representation. Examples of questions which were coded as thus are as follows:

155

To ask the Minister for Women and Equalities what steps she plans to take to reduce (a) the gender pay gap and (b) sex discrimination in the workplace.

- William Bain (Lab, Glasgow North East) 11/10/2010.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what steps she is taking to tackle transphobia in the UK; and if she will make a statement.

- Chuka Umunna (Lab, Streatham) 17/12/2014.

Below, Table 6.3 presents a set of descriptive statistics detailing the number of questions tabled by MPs that pertained to I.O. Prejudice and Other Prejudice based on whether the MPs who had tabled these questions came from an immigrant or a native British background. In addition, it shows a breakdown of these questions based on whether the MPs were white or belonged to an ethnic minority as well as observing the statistical associations between these dependent and independent variables. It shows that 220 questions were tabled over the course of the 2010-15 Parliament that were deemed to relate to I.O. Prejudice while 137 questions were tabled that pertained to Other Prejudice.

Turning to the association statistics, the chi-square tests concerning I.O. Prejudice reveal that the association between this dependent variable and the I.O. MP dummy variable is significant at ten per cent while the relationship between I.O. Prejudice and the binary ethnicity variable was, conversely, found not to be statistically significant. Hence, the null hypothesis cannot be rejected in the latter instance. Regarding Other Prejudice, the chi- square tests demonstrate that the association between this dependent variable and both of the aforementioned independent variables were statistically significant meaning that the null hypothesis in regard to both cases can be rejected.

156

Table 6. 3. I.O. Prejudice & Other Prejudice-related questions – total numbers and column percentages Other Question Question explicitly Total related to I.O. Prejudice Native MP 158,000 (82.58%) 192 (87.27%) 158,192 (82.58%) I.O. MP 33,333 (17.42%) 28 (12.73%) 33,361 (17.42%) Total 191,333 (100.00%) 220 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00%) Pearson chi ² = 3.37 p = 0.07 Other Question Question explicitly Total related to Other Prejudice Native MP 158,090 (82.59%) 102 (74.45%) 158,192 (82.58%) I.O. MP 33,326 (17.41%) 35 (25.55%) 33,361 (17.42%) Total 191,416 (100.00%) 137 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00%) Pearson chi ² = 6.3 p = 0.01 Other Question Question explicitly Total related to I.O. Prejudice White MP 176,871 (92.44%) 205 (93.18%) 177,076 (92.44%) BAME MP 14,462 (7.56%) 15 (6.82%) 14,477 (7.56%) Total 191,333 (100.00%) 220 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00%) Pearson chi ² = 0.17 p = 0.68 Other Question Question explicitly Total related to Other Prejudice White MP 176,961 (92.45%) 115 (83.94%) 177,076 (92.44%) BAME MP 14,455 (7.55%) 22 (16.06%) 14,477 (7.56%) Total 191,416 (100.00%) 137 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00%) Pearson chi ² = 14.18 p = 0.00 Source: Author’s own.

Independent & Control Variables

The independent and control variables that are present in this chapter but not in others are presented in Table 6.4. The first of these is a dichotomous gender variable (Female MP) which groups MPs on the basis of their gender (0=male, 1=female). This is used in the models which use Other Prejudice as their dependent variable as women MPs may have been more inclined to table questions relating to sexism. Next, the Relevant

157

Experience/Knowledge variable in this chapter records whether or not MPs have experience or knowledge in regard to this policy area, either before or during their parliamentary career (0=no, 1=yes). In creating this variable, as outlined in the Methods chapter, MPs who had a relevant occupation prior to becoming an MP 41 and or who were members of a relevant parliamentary committee 42 longer than any other committee were coded in this manner. In addition, MPs who were a part of an APPG addressing prejudice such as those on Anti- Semitism and Islamophobia were likewise coded this way.

Moving on, the variable known as Age is a continuous variable that registers the age of each MP when he or she entered the 2010-15 Parliament, either as a returner or a new entrant. In the case of MPs who entered the Commons later following a by-election, the age coded was their age at the time of their by-election victory. This variable has been incorporated in the following regression analysis because younger MPs may have taken a greater interest in matters concerning prejudice and discrimination than their older parliamentary colleagues and may, therefore, have had a higher tendency to submit these types of questions to ministers.

Meanwhile, the fourth of these explanatory variables seeks to assess the potential influence that local factors may have on the likelihood that MPs will put forward questions relating to prejudice has been termed Anti-Immigrant Party Presence (AIPP). This has been formed by assigning to each MP the combined vote share received by anti-immigrant parties in the parliamentary election that immediately preceded the submission of the question. 43 It has been claimed by anti-racism campaign groups that racist attacks had risen in areas where the British National Party (BNP) has made electoral gains; such as in the aftermath of their local election victories in Burnley and in Halifax in the early 2000s (Renton, 2005). Similar claims were made following the party’s successes in the European Parliament elections in 2009 in areas that had been specifically targeted by the party (Hurst & Keely, 2009). The rise of these groups may also have an adverse effect on other minority groups. Cutts, Ford and Goodwin (2011: 422) observe that the BNP have ‘mobilised hostility towards out-groups

41 While no MPs were found to have worked in a ‘relevant’ occupation prior to entering Parliament, it was, however, noted that Labour MP Peter Hain was an anti-apartheid campaigner and Labour’s Sadiq Khan was a solicitor who handled discrimination cases. Both have thus been coded as having prior relevant experience/knowledge. 42 In the case of this chapter, this includes MPs who had served on the Home Affairs Select Committee as this committee has investigated issues such as hate crime and abuse online in addition to different forms of prejudice, for example, anti-Semitism. 43 These parties are the British National Party (BNP), UK Independence Party (UKIP) and the National Front (NF). While UKIP is considered an anti-immigrant party, it is, however, regarded as distinct from the BNP and other radical right parties as nativism is not a core feature the party’s ideology (Mudde, 2017). The party has, nonetheless, adopted a populist programme and themes similar to those used by the BNP (Copsey et al., 2013; Cutts, Ford & Goodwin, 2011) and has drawn its support from the same pool of voters as the BNP (Cospey et al., 2013).

158 defined by their sexuality’. This variable, therefore, seeks to examine whether higher levels of support for anti-immigrant parties have had on the likelihood that MPs will table questions relating to both I.O. Prejudice and Other Prejudice.

Finally, two control variables that are unique to this chapter were adopted. These note the number of questions that MPs submitted that did not relate to I.O. Prejudice and Other

Prejudice respectively (see Table 6.4).

Table 6. 4. Independent & Control Variables (Descriptive Statistics) Variable N Mean Standard Minimum Maximum Deviation

Female MP (dummy) 669 0.22 0.42 0 1

Relevant 669 0.04 0.21 0 1 Experience/Knowledge (dummy)

Age 669 49.32 10.4 25 80

Anti-Immigrant Party 669 5.27 3.94 0 38.7 Presence (AIPP)

Qs not relating to I.O. 669 286.33 402.17 0 4041 Prejudice

Qs not relating to 669 286.45 402.46 0 4041 Other Prejudice Source: Author’s own.

Results

The first set of results, in which I.O. Prejudice is used as the dependent variable, is presented in Table 6.5. I.O. Prejudice is an overdispersed count variable, and so negative binomial regression is the most appropriate form of analysis in these instances.

The first of these models to use I.O. Prejudice as their dependent variable, Model 1a, suggests that there was a modest positive relationship between having an immigrant background and the submission of parliamentary questions addressing I.O. Prejudice, although this result was not statistically significant. We are thus unable to accept or to refute the first hypothesis (H1) on the basis of the result registered in this model. Model 1a similarly indicates that there existed a modest positive association between having non-white ethnicity and tabling a larger number of questions concerning I.O. Prejudice, a finding which would support the second hypothesis (H2). However, this result was not found to be

159 statistically significant. Consequently, neither this observed association nor H2 can be confirmed.

Thirdly, the model suggests that Labour party membership had a marginal negative effect on the submission of parliamentary questions that related to I.O. Prejudice. This would thus invalidate the third hypothesis (H3) which predicted that Labour MPs would submit more questions relating to I.O. Prejudice. However, this result was not found to be statistically significant. Next, the Relevant Experience variable observes that MPs with current or previous experience pertaining to discrimination were considerably more likely to table questions of this nature. Meanwhile, the remaining four explanatory variables, Age, Constituency Cosmopolitanism, AIPP and Marginality, all exhibited neutral effects, suggesting that an MP’s age, the levels of foreign-born and BAME residents in MPs’ constituencies, the electoral strength of anti-immigrant parties and an MP’s electoral majority all had little effect on the tabling of questions pertaining to I.O. Prejudice. These four independent variables, however, were not statistically significant and thus the results they register in Model 1a cannot be adopted with confidence.

To expand on this analysis, an almost identical model was run (Model 1b) which includes the same variables in addition to an interaction between belonging to an ethnic minority and being a Labour MP. This allows for an examination of the influence that ethnicity and partisanship may have had on the submission of I.O. Prejudice-related questions. The result from this interaction suggests that Labour BAME Members were marginally more inclined to submit questions addressing racial, ethnic and religious forms of prejudice than other MPs. However, this result, like many of the others produced in Model 1b, is not statistically significant. Hence, we are once again unable to either confirm or reject both this result for Labour BAME MPs and the hypotheses outlined earlier in the chapter.

160

Table 6. 5. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to I.O. Prejudice Dependent Variable I.O. Prejudice I.O. Prejudice Model 1a Model 1b Independent Variables

Immigrant-origin MP 1.12 (0.47) 1.12 (0.47) (dummy)

BAME MP (dummy) 2.60 (1.68) 2.44 (1.92)

Labour MP (dummy) 0.66 (0.22) 0.66 (0.22)

Relevant 3.81 (1.56) *** 3.81 (1.56) *** Experience/Knowledge (dummy)

Age 1.01 (0.1) 1.01 (0.01)

Interaction BAME MP* 1.10 (1.12) Labour MP

Constituency 1.01 (0.01) 1.01 (0.01) Cosmopolitanism

Anti-Immigrant Party 1.01 (0.04) 1.01 (0.04) Presence (AIPP)

Marginality 1.02 (0.01) 1.02 (0.01)

Qs not relating to I.O. 1.00 (0.001) *** 1.00 (0.001) *** Prejudice

Ministerial Service (months) 0.99 (0.02) 0.99 (0.02)

Service as MP during 2010- 1.02 (0.02) 1.02 (0.02) 15 Parliament (months) Constant 0.01 (0.01) *** 0.01 (0.01) *** McFadden’s r² 0.14 0.14 N 669 669 *p<0.1 **p<0.05 ***p<0.01 Incidence Rate Ratios (robust standard errors clustered around Name of MP in brackets).

The second set of results, presented below in Table 6.6, outlines the incidence rates for the number of questions relating to the second dependent variable, Other Prejudice. Like I.O. Prejudice, this second dependent variable is also an overdispersed count variable and so negative binomial regression was once again employed when carrying out this analysis.

161

The first model (2a) suggests that an MP’s family background had almost no effect on their likelihood of submitting questions pertaining to Other Prejudice. However, this result was found not to be statistically significant; consequently, H1 cannot be accepted or refuted. Next, the model also indicates that BAME MPs were substantially more inclined to submit questions pertaining to Other Prejudice than white MPs. This may suggest that BAME Members substantively represented other forms of prejudice to a considerably greater extent than white MPs. Yet once again, this result was not found, as can be observed below, to be statistically significant. It cannot, therefore, be concluded that ethnic minority MPs can be counted upon to raise issues relating to other types of intolerance and prejudice such as homophobia and sexism through their parliamentary questions. As a result, H2 can be neither validated nor invalidated.

Meanwhile, Model 2a suggests that membership of the Parliamentary Labour Party had a modest effect on the likelihood of MPs to table questions on types of prejudice categorised under Other Prejudice. Yet as this result is not statistically significant, H3 cannot be confirmed or rejected. Similarly, the proportion of foreign-born and BAME residents in a constituency and the electoral presence of anti-immigrant parties were both found to have had non-existent effects on the dependent variable. Neither result, however, were noted to be statistically significant. Interestingly, female MPs exhibited a greater likelihood of tabling questions than male parliamentarians (IRR = 2.04 p = <0.05), demonstrating that female MPs showed a greater interest in highlighting other types of prejudice, such as those listed above, through their parliamentary questions for written answer.

The final model, Model 2b, includes the same independent and control variables in addition to the BAME MP/Labour MP interaction used in Model 1b. An additional interaction has been incorporated (Female MP * BAME MP) as BAME MPs were more gender-balanced than white MPs during the 2010-15 Parliament 44 and this interaction allows us to study the effect that gender and ethnicity had on questions relating to Other Prejudice. In this model, the Immigrant-origin MP and Labour MP dummy variables again exhibited neutral and moderate positive relationships with the dependent variable respectively. However, as neither result is statistically significant, they cannot be accepted. Moreover, we are unable to confirm or refute H1 and H3. Under this model, BAME MPs demonstrated a considerably higher tendency to substantively represent matters pertaining to Other Prejudice (IRR = 4.03 p = <0.01), thus lending strong support to the second hypothesis. Meanwhile, the relationship between being a BAME Labour Member and Other Prejudice is noted as being moderately positive (IRR = 1.14 p = <0.01). Conversely, the association between being a female BAME MP and the dependent variable is moderately inverse but not statistically significant.

44 In this Parliament, 36% of BAME MPs were female while 22 % of white MPs were female.

162

The results for the Relevant Experience, Age, Constituency Cosmopolitanism, AIPP and Marginality variables, however, closely resemble those registered in Model 2a. Lastly, the result for the Female MP variable remains virtually unchanged, thus reinforcing the result recorded in Model 2a.

163

Table 6. 6. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to Other Prejudice Dependent Variable Other Prejudice Other Prejudice Model 2a Model 2b Independent Variables

Immigrant-origin MP 0.86 (0.48) 0.89 (0.51) (dummy)

BAME MP (dummy) 2.96 (2.30) 4.03 (7.67) ***

Female MP (dummy) 2.04 (0.65) ** 2.08 (0.68) **

Labour MP (dummy) 1.61 (0.50) 1.43 (0.45)

Relevant 1.06 (0.74) 1.00 (0.71) Experience/Knowledge (dummy)

Age 0.96 (0.01) *** 0.96 (0.01) ***

Interaction BAME MP* 1.14 (1.75) *** Labour MP

Interaction Female MP* 0.91 (1.13) BAME MP

Constituency 1.01 (0.01) 1.01 (0.01) Cosmopolitanism

Anti-Immigrant Party 1.03 (0.04) 1.04 (0.04) Presence (AIPP)

Marginality 0.99 (0.01) 0.99 (0.01)

Qs not relating to Other 1.00 (0.00) *** 1.00 (0.00) *** Prejudice

Ministerial Service (months) 0.95 (0.03) * 0.95 (0.03) *

Service as MP during 2010- 1.03 (0.02) 1.03 (0.02) 15 Parliament (months) Constant 0.04 (0.06) ** 0.04 (0.06) ** McFadden’s r² 0.18 0.18 N 669 669 *p<0.1 **p<0.05 ***p<0.01 Incidence Rate Ratios (robust standard errors clustered around Name of MP in brackets).

164

Discussion

As noted throughout this dissertation, a common theme found within normative literature on minority group representation is the theory that minority groups will have their interests best represented by descriptive representatives; in other words, by elected officials with whom they share traits or characteristics such as race or ethnicity, socioeconomic background or gender.

The results from Models 1a and 1b suggest that immigrant-origin legislators showed a greater tendency to table questions relating to I.O. Prejudice during the 2010-15 Parliament than native British legislators. Yet due to the lack of statistically significant results present in Models 1a and 1b, these results and others generated in the models, such as the apparent positive relationship between this dependent variable and non-white ethnicity and the seemingly moderate inverse association between I.O. Prejudice and membership of the Parliamentary Labour Party, cannot thus be adopted with confidence. As a result, adequate summations about the link between immigrant-origin status and the tabling of questions relating to types of prejudice which affect individuals from an immigrant background cannot be made from these data.

Turning now to the chapter’s second line of enquiry, the results presented in Models 2a and 2b indicate that coming from an immigrant background had no meaningful effect on how likely or unlikely MPs were to table questions addressing Other Prejudice. However, this result is not statistically significant. That being said, the second of these models (2b) provides firm evidence that MPs from a BAME background were much more likely to submit parliamentary questions that addressed forms of prejudice directed at other underrepresented groups. This indicates, as discussed earlier, that ethnic minority legislators may possess a ‘cross-minority’ group consciousness which motivates them to represent other groups such as women, sexual minorities, those with disabilities and those with different gender identities. This hypothesis was based on the assumption that the experience of having lived life as a member of a minority group would provide these legislators with an added awareness and sensitivity to the prejudices that members of other traditionally disadvantaged groups may face. In turn, this would engender in these legislators a sense of solidarity and an impetus to confront these issues while serving in elected office.

What is also demonstrated in Table 6.6 is that there was a statistically significant association between being a female MP and the tabling of a higher number of questions relating to Other Prejudice. Female MPs’ higher inclination to table more questions addressing other types of

165 prejudice could be attributed to the fact that matters relating to sexism, which is, by definition, relevant to women, has been categorised under Other Prejudice. In addition, as women constitute a demographic which has been and continues to be underrepresented in politics, female legislators may take a greater interest in highlighting and addressing types of prejudice directed at other underrepresented and traditionally disadvantaged groups. To conclude this section, it is worth discussing possible limitations with this chapter’s findings and overall research design. To begin with, as noted in Table 6.3, only a relatively small number of questions were judged to relate to the two dependent variables employed in the chapter, I.O. Prejudice and Other Prejudice. Owing to this low number of cases, the above regression models have registered results which are largely not statistically significant. Therefore, it is more difficult to gain results about which we can be confident.

Secondly, the search terms used to identify parliamentary questions contain many words and phrases, such as ‘hate crime’ and ‘intolerance’ that refer more directly to prejudice. Consequently, this may mean that questions that potentially relate to either I.O. Prejudice or Other Prejudice are excluded from the analysis which may address discrimination in a more ‘subtle’ manner, such as when the context or the motivation behind submitting the question is less apparent. An example of which could be if an MP appeals to the government to provide statistics concerning members of staff by ethnicity in a particular department, agency or public service as the MP is seeking to highlight possible discrimination in the recruitment of staff, although this may not be apparent simply from the text of the question.

Conclusion

This chapter has had two main objectives. Firstly, it has sought to determine whether immigrant-origin British Members of Parliament were more likely to have tabled parliamentary questions for written answer that addressed types of prejudice affecting immigrant-origin citizens during the 2010-15 Parliament. Its second objective was to provide an initial investigation into whether immigrant-origin MPs have substantively represented the interests of other minority groups on matters relating to prejudice. This was an enquiry which was loosely based on and inspired by Mansbridge’s conception of surrogate representatives and sought to examine the existence of a possible ‘cross-minority’ solidarity or consciousness among immigrant-origin MPs, which encourages them to take a greater interest in addressing forms of prejudice directed at other politically underrepresented groups, such as women and individuals with disabilities.

166

In academic literature, minority group consciousness has had a predominantly American focus, although this phenomenon has been observed among elected British legislators (Jones et al., 2015; Nixon, 1998; Sobolewska, McKee & Campbell, 2018). However, the notion of a ‘cross-minority’ consciousness has been unexplored in academic literature and further research would improve our understanding of minority representation. Normative literature suggests that increasing the proportion of descriptive representatives in elected office will ensure that minority group interests will receive a more prominent voice in the House of Commons. Earlier studies have demonstrated evidence of a positive link between descriptive and substantive representation in the British House of Commons. These studies discovered that ethnic minority MPs were more inclined to submit questions relating to ‘minority’ issues such as immigration to the UK and ethnic/racial diversity (Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013). Findings presented in this chapter indicate that by increasing the proportion of immigrant-origin Members of the House of Commons will lead to matters relating to I.O. Prejudice featuring more regularly in parliamentary questions, although these results cannot be substantiated owing to its lack of statistical significance.

The second part of the investigation, which has involved an exploration into the existence of cross-minority group consciousness or solidarity, found in Model 2b, reveals evidence that a strong positive association between non-European ancestry and the tabling of questions relating to Other Prejudice exists. In addition, gender was found to be an important determinant as female MPs showed a greater tendency to submit questions on types of prejudice categorised under Other Prejudice. This could be attributed to the fact that women, as discussed in the prior section of this chapter, are more motivated to address sexism. Furthermore, as women have and continue to be descriptively underrepresented in politics, they may also exhibit signs of what is referred to here as ‘cross-group consciousness’.

This chapter has shown that, in practice, the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation of immigrant-origin citizens does not necessarily mirror what has been suggested in normative literature. It has not found evidence that increasing the number of immigrant-origin representatives will further the representation of issues relating to both I.O. Prejudice and Other Prejudice. However, results from Model 2b indicate that this could, in relation to the latter, be best achieved through the election of more BAME Members. In future research, cross-minority group consciousness could be explored in relation to other topics, thus improving our understanding of what remains an unexplored area of research within the field of political representation.

167

Chapter 7. Evidence of Substantive Representation in Different Policy Areas: Crime and the Criminal Justice System

The third of this dissertation’s ‘policy area’ chapters analyses immigrant-origin MPs’ predisposition to substantively represent the interests of I.O. individuals in regard to crime and the criminal justice system (CJS).

As has been introduced earlier, individuals from an immigrant background are more likely to feel anxious about becoming a victim of various types of crime (Salisbury & Upson, 2004). In addition, other empirical research has highlighted that certain sections of the British immigrant-origin population have a greater likelihood of becoming a victim of various types of crimes such as homicide (Parmar, 2014; Phillips & Bowling, 2017), other forms of violent crime and theft (Rossetti, Dinisman & Maroz, 2016), racially and religiously motivated hate crime (Corcoran, Lader & Smith, 2015), personal offences (Jansson, 2006) and vehicle theft (Salisbury & Upson, 2004) than the native British population.

Furthermore, other research has shown that levels of racial and ethnic disproportionality among deaths in police custody, the use of force and stop and search powers and rates of incarceration. This has led this and other research to conclude that law enforcement and the criminal justice system (CJS) treat immigrant-origin suspects less favourably and more harshly than native British suspects (James, 2006; Newburn, Shiner & Hayman, 2004; Parmar, 2014; Phillips & Bowling, 2017; Waddington, Stenson & Don, 2004). While this discussion has, both inside and outside of academic work, often centred on ethnic minorities; in particular, young black and mixed-race males, there is evidence that minority white groups have received less favourable treatment from the police (James, 2006; Phillips & Bowling, 2017; Waddington, Stenson & Don, 2004). This does, however, remain an underdeveloped body of research and the use of ‘catch-all’ white categories when gathering crime data inhibits academic understanding of the interests of other groups and how their interests may differ (Waddington, Stenson & Don, 2004).

This chapter pursues two lines of enquiry. The first of which examines the extent to which immigrant-origin MPs substantively represented the interests of the immigrant-origin population in regard to crime by submitting proportionally more questions addressing crimes which have disproportionately affected individuals from an immigrant background and which immigrant-origin individuals have expressed concerns about. The second, meanwhile,

168 assesses the extent to which immigrant-origin MPs likewise substantively represented the interests of immigrant-origin individuals in relation to law enforcement and the criminal justice system (CJS) by highlighting and drawing attention, through their parliamentary questions, to procedures and practices that disproportionately affect immigrant-origin individuals.

The chapter’s results suggest that immigrant-origin MPs exhibited a lower tendency to substantively represent both sets of interests than native MPs, although neither of these results was statistically significant. BAME MPs did, however, show a greater and statistically significant inclination to submit questions relating to the first inquiry. This, once again, indicates that non-European ancestry plays a more critical role than having immigrant heritage in shaping MPs’ likelihood of substantively representing the interests of I.O. individuals.

This chapter adheres to a similar structure to that which is found in the preceding two chapters. It continues by providing an outline of the hypotheses that are examined before detailing the aforementioned disparities in crime and law enforcement-related data. Latterly, it presents and discusses its results.

Hypotheses

This chapter, like the preceding chapter on prejudice, adopts three hypotheses which are broadly similar to those that feature in the other three policy area chapters. The first of which (H1), is based on the premise that MPs from an immigrant background will have shown a greater tendency to substantively represent the interests of immigrant-origin British citizens and residents. The formation of his hypothesis was guided by the fact that a body of empirical research has observed evidence of a positive association between descriptive and substantive representation. The first hypothesis is thus:

H1: Immigrant-origin MPs will have been more likely to table questions pertaining to crime and apparent bias in the criminal justice system than their native parliamentary colleagues.

The second hypothesis, on the other hand, predicts that ethnic minority MPs will have been more likely than white MPs to have substantively represented I.O. interests in relation to crime and the CJS. In the case of the former, BAME MPs may have a greater knowledge

169 and understanding of how crime affects individuals and communities than their white parliamentary colleagues owing to the fact that many BAME MPs represent urban, higher- crime constituencies and or because they themselves have and or have had experience of living in areas where crime was a more pressing concern for residents. 45 Meanwhile, in the case of the latter, BAME MPs may have had first-hand experience of possible discriminatory treatment, such as racial ‘profiling’ by members of the police or have had relatives, friends or constituents who have had this kind of experience. These issues may not resonate with white MPs to the same extent, owing to the fact that they have not had the same experiences.

Furthermore, ethnic minority MPs decision to take a greater interest in these topics may be influenced, to return to the earlier discussions, by group consciousness and possibly linked fate. Part of their decision to do so may be because they wish to raise the issue of crime in their questions. Their interest in possible injustices in the criminal justice system might be motivated by a desire to help individuals who likewise belong to an ethnic minority. Conversely, the motivation to represent concerns about racially and ethnically motivated crime(s) may not be apparent, or as strongly apparent, among white MPs, including both native and immigrant-origin, as racial or ethnic crime is not thought to affect white people to the same extent, if at all. Hence, MPs do not consider it an issue that needs to be represented.

Hence, the chapter’s second hypothesis is thus:

H2: Parliamentarians from a minority ethnic background were more inclined to submit questions relating to crime and apparent unfairness in the CJS than white parliamentarians.

The third and final hypothesis has been adopted because MPs’ willingness to highlight matters pertaining to crime and the criminal justice system may be linked to two specific matters relating to their parliamentary constituency; first, whether they represent a more urbanised constituency and second, whether they hold a seat with higher levels of reported crime. This hypothesis reads as follows:

H3: MPs who represent constituencies with higher levels of reported crime will have demonstrated a greater tendency to submit more questions relating to crime and bias

45 Most of Britain’s minority ethnic population is concentrated in urban areas (see Jivraj & Khan, 2013).

170

in the criminal justice system than Westminster colleagues who represented seats with lower levels of reported crime. Likewise, MPs elected in constituencies which are categorised as being more ‘urban’ will also table more questions addressing crime and the CJS.

I.O. Individuals’ Anxieties about and Reported Experiences of Crime

The first of this chapter’s two lines of inquiry is based on two aspects. Firstly, anxieties and fears about crime and, secondly, experiences of crime. This section of the chapter explores both of these in greater detail.

While residents of inner-city areas and individuals with past experience(s) of crime have registered higher levels of concern about crime (Simmons & Dodd, 2003); however, as noted previously in Chapter 4, individuals from an immigrant background have consistently expressed greater anxieties and fears about becoming a victim of crime (Phillips & Bowling, 2017; Salisbury & Upson, 2004). Concerns about crime have been found to be more prevalent among ethnic minorities than among people of white ethnicity. Ethnic minorities have expressed greater concerns about becoming a victim of a broad range of crimes such as burglary, car crime and violent crime (Salisbury & Upson, 2004). While the BAME population is largely concentrated in urban areas which have tended to attract higher levels of criminal activity (Jivraj & Khan, 2013), ethnic minorities’ greater anxieties about crime have been found to persist after controlling for area of residence and whether or not individual respondents had been, over the course of the previous twelve months, a victim of the crime(s) that they had expressed concern(s) about (Salisbury & Upson, 2004).

Among ethnic minority individuals who have reported being victims of crime, there has been a fairly persistent belief that the crime(s) committed against them was racially motivated (Jansson, 2006). As many individuals from a BAME background are physically distinct, this may potentially place them at greater risk from criminals with racist motivations. This distinctiveness may contribute to heightened concerns and anxieties about crime as physical distinctiveness extends beyond the first generation to those born and raised in the UK and in possession of British citizenship from birth. By contrast, the families of white immigrants do not retain more obvious signs of distinctiveness, such as accent, beyond the first generation.

Due to the noticeable differences between groups with regards to their levels of anxiety about crime, MPs have further opportunities by which to substantively represent these issues through their parliamentary questions. This could be done, for instance, by drawing attention to the fact that their constituents have voiced concerns about crime in their

171 neighbourhoods or by querying the impact that certain changes in policy or measures may increase individuals’ anxieties about crime. A set of phrases including ‘concern(s) about’, ‘anxiety(ies) about’, ‘fear(s) about’, were, therefore, added to the ‘crime’ search term dictionary (see Appendix II) with the aim of locating parliamentary questions that highlight or make reference to anxieties about crime among minority groups and the general public. While the earlier part of this section has explored immigrant-origin individuals’ anxieties about becoming a victim of crime and how their concerns differ from those of native Britons, the latter half of this section explores how immigrant-origin individuals’ reported experiences of crime are different to those of the native population.

Firstly, it is important to mention that while a significant proportion of the UK’s immigrant- origin population is concentrated in higher-crime, urban areas (Jivraj & Khan, 2013), research indicates that there is not a clear relationship between coming from an immigrant background and being at an increased risk of criminal victimisation (Papadopoulos, 2012). What studies have demonstrated, however, is that particular immigrant-origin communities are at a greater risk of victimisation from certain types of crime activity than others, such as homicide (Parmar, 2014; Phillips & Bowling, 2017), theft and other forms of violent crime (Rossetti, Dinisman & Maroz, 2016), crimes motivated by racial and or religious prejudice (Corcoran, Lader & Smith, 2015), personal offences (Jansson, 2006) and vehicle theft (Salisbury & Upson, 2004) in relation to the native British population.

Much of the academic research into minority groups’ experiences of crime and the criminal justice system is based on findings from the aforementioned British Crime Survey (BCS) and or its successor, the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW), which are recognised as official measures of crime victimisation in England and Wales. Both the BCS and the CSEW are face to face surveys which ask their respondents to provide details about their experience(s) of crime during the last twelve months as well as their attitudes to crime- related subjects, the police and the criminal justice system (Salisbury & Upson, 2004). 46

Crucially, both of these surveys have provided a more accurate picture of the actual levels of crime compared to reported crime data due to the fact that many crimes go unreported, either because victims are fearful of potential reprisals or because the crime committed against them was not considered worth reporting to police (Bell & Machin, 2013). For instance, 1.2 million property crimes were reported in 2009; however, the BCS estimates that 2.89 million crimes of this nature actually occurred during this year (Bell & Machin, 2013). Similarly, the CSEW, the successor to the BCS, estimates that only four out of ten crimes

46 Crime Survey for England and Wales http://www.crimesurvey.co.uk/en/AboutTheSurvey.html (accessed 20 February 2019).

172 committed in England and Wales have been reported to the police. 47 Importantly for research investigating rates of victimisation among immigrant-origin communities, both the CSEW and the BCS have asked respondents to provide their nationality, thus allowing researchers to ascertain how victimisation rates for foreign nationals compare to those of British nationality. After controlling for locality and personal characteristics, data from the older BCS has found that foreign nationals are slightly less likely to report being victims of both violent and non-violent crime than British citizens (Bell & Machin, 2011, 2013). While this may indicate that immigrants experience lower rates of victimisation, it may also suggest that they have different likelihoods of reporting crime(s). There is evidence that both immigrants and or ethnic minorities are more reluctant to report their victimisation than native Britons, in particular when the crime committed against them was either a violent or property crime. When personal and neighbourhood characteristics are accounted for, similar observations are also made, therefore suggesting that immigrants and ethnic minorities exercise greater caution when making contact with authorities (Bell & Machin, 2011).

Interestingly, some research suggests that immigrants may, in fact, be at a lower risk of criminal victimisation. A study of two relatively recent migrant ‘waves’ to the UK: migrants from the EU A8 countries and asylum seekers of mainly Iraqi, Afghan, Somali and Yugoslavian origin who arrived in the UK during the late 1990s and early 2000s concluded that immigrants belonging to either of these waves experienced lower victimisation rates than natives (Bell, Fasani & Machin, 2013). Similarly, crime and self-victimisation data from so-called migrant ‘enclaves’ (which are defined as neighbourhoods where immigrants account for at least 30 per cent of the population) has found that crime rates are lower in these neighbourhoods (Bell & Machin, 2013).

In addition to asking respondents to provide their nationality, the BCS and the CSEW also document the ethnic identity of its respondents. From these data, the BCS has observed that all minority ethnic groups were marginally more likely to have reported being a victim of crime over the course of the previous twelve months than white people (Jansson et al., 2007). However, the differences in victimisation between each of the minority ethnic groups and the white majority were found to be only slight. Of the minority groups, individuals of mixed heritage were at the highest risk of victimisation (Ibid.). Various editions of the BCS have likewise documented that individuals of mixed ethnicity have been most likely to report crime victimisation out of all ethnic groups surveyed (Jansson, 2006; Rossetti, Dinisman & Maroz, 2016; Salisbury & Upson, 2004). People of mixed ethnicity are at the greatest risk from both types of theft (personal and household) and violence (with/without injury) (Rossetti, Dinisman & Maroz, 2016). This can be, however, partly attributable to the younger

47 Ibid. (accessed 20 February 2019).

173 age profile of the mixed-race demographic, which places them at heightened risk from criminals (Flatley et al., 2010).

When looking at types of crime individually, it is revealed that certain I.O. communities are at a heightened risk of crime compared to the native population. Ministry of Justice figures from 2015, for instance, observed that individuals from an ethnic minority background have a greater likelihood of becoming a murder victim than white individuals. There is a significant disparity between black and white individuals with the former being four times more likely to be murdered than the latter, whereas Asians are 1.5 times more likely (Phillips & Bowling, 2017). Moreover, a higher proportion of murder cases involving black victims are left unsolved (Phillips & Bowling, 2007). Black people in the United Kingdom have also been over-represented among victims of homicide; a broad term that encompasses murder, infanticide and manslaughter (Parmar, 2014; Phillips & Webster, 2013). In addition, black people are disproportionately the victims and suspects of gun crime. While gun violence is relatively rare in the UK, black murder victims are more likely to have been killed by a firearm than murder victims of a white or Asian background (Phillips & Bowling, 2007).

BCS research has consistently shown that ethnicity is not, in and of itself, independently associated with being at a higher risk of crime (Corcoran, Lader & Smith, 2015; Jansson et al., 2007). According to multivariate analysis of BCS data, risk of victimisation is associated with factors such as age, earning a lower income, unemployment and inner-city residence, among others. A number of these factors may explain why certain immigrant-origin communities are at a greater risk of victimisation (Ibid). Instead, risk of victimisation of any personal crime and violent crime is associated with age, being male and single, being of mixed ethnicity and residence in an area with high levels of anti-social behaviour (Ibid.).

While I.O. individuals do not, in general, appear to suffer from higher levels of victimisation than native Britons, there is evidence that certain immigrant-origin groups are at greater risk of particular types of crime than the indigenous UK population and other immigrant-origin groups. These findings have meant that the search term dictionary employed in this chapter has been assembled in order to make it easier to locate parliamentary questions that address these types of crime.

Fairness in the Criminal Justice System

There have long been concerns that individuals from an immigrant background, particularly ethnic minorities, are treated less fairly by the police and criminal justice system (Phillips & Bowling, 2007). These charges became especially prominent following the publication of the

174 report conducted by the Inquiry into the high-profile racist murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993 which concluded that the London Metropolitan Police and police services generally, were affected by institutional racism (Macpherson, 1999).

Relations between the police and immigrant-origin communities have, for many years been viewed as tense and characterised by a lack of trust (Phillips & Bowling, 2017). There has been a perception among minority communities – including white minorities such as the Irish – that members of these communities are ‘over-policed’ and excessively monitored by law enforcement (Phillips & Bowling, 2007). Complaints against the police made by ethnic minorities, particularly among black people, have been disproportionately high relative to their share of the national population (Reiner, 2010).

Perhaps the most visible and contentious aspects of this debate have centred on the use of police stop and search powers. These powers permit police to carry out searches on individuals whom they have ‘reasonable suspicion’ have committed an offence (Phillips & Bowling, 2017). These powers have been controversial as ethnic minorities, especially young black and mixed-race males; have been disproportionately subject to these searches, often ostensibly with the objective of uncovering drugs (Webster, 2007). Racial and ethnic disparities in stop and search figures became more prevalent during the 2000s when the number of individuals of black and Asian ethncity who were stopped and searched increased while the number of white people who were subject to this procedure decreased (Parmar, 2014). Data from 2004/05 observed that black people were six times more likely and Asians were twice as likely to be stopped and searched as white people. Black suspects are three times more likely to be arrested than white suspects and less likely to be cautioned (Phillips & Bowling, 2007). Stark racial and ethnic disparities have similarly been observed in data on counter-terrorism measures known as ‘suspicionless searches’, although levels of racial and ethnic disproportionality in these searches have dropped in recent years (Phillips & Bowling, 2017). Studies examining the apparent higher levels of mistreatment of ethnic minorities at the hands of the police have also highlighted that young black and mixed-race males have accounted for a disproportionately high number of deaths in police custody (Ibid.) and among subjects of strip searches (Newburn, Shiner & Hayman, 2004)

Furthermore, in courts, there has been a perception among BAME defendants and solicitors that defendants are treated less fairly (Phillips & Bowling, 2007). Minority ethnic defendants, both male and female, had 40 and 30 per cent higher odds of custodial sentencing compared with white defendants, regardless of criminal history (Hopkins, 2015). However, it should be noted that this particular study did not include possible exploratory variables such as offence seriousness (Phillips & Bowling, 2017). Data of prison population in the UK has also noted levels of disproportionality. At the end of 2016, for instance, 27 per cent of prison

175 inmates were of minority ethnic origin, a figure that has remained relatively stable since 2005, although ethnic minorities account for roughly 12 per cent of the UK population (Allen & Watson, 2017).

The Greater Focus on Ethnic Minorities in Extant Research

As has been highlighted earlier in the dissertation, one of the difficulties of researching substantive representation of the immigrant-origin population is that research has focused predominantly on ethnic minorities, while less attention has been afforded to white individuals from an immigrant background.

Similarly, the literature on immigrant-origin communities’ anxieties and direct experience(s) of crime, the police and the criminal justice system is predominantly explored and discussed in the context of ethnic minorities. On one hand, this may be attributable to the nature of the data that has been available to researchers. Most research draws its conclusions from data taken from the aforementioned BCS and its successor, the CSEW, both of which have offered a single white category for all respondents who identify as white, whereas respondents who identify as non-white have a broader range of categories such as mixed ethnicity, black and Asian from which to choose. Hence, the experiences of the Irish, Eastern Europeans and other minority white groups are rarely present in empirical research or even noticed as they are often incorporated in a broad, catch-all ‘white’ category (Waddington, Stenson & Don, 2004). Consequently, ascertaining how the interests of individuals from different white backgrounds may or may not differ from the native British is much more difficult as there is no way of differentiating between native Britons and immigrant-origin whites.

Furthermore, there may be a belief among researchers that research examining white minorities is not warranted, owing to a perception that, as discussed earlier in the chapter and elsewhere in the dissertation, white society is more homogeneous and that white individuals, irrespective of their family background, will move seamlessly into British society. This has been challenged by researchers, such as those who have studied white immigrant- origin groups in the UK. They claim that the Irish, for example, are disadvantaged by these generalisations. As a result, this has elicited calls for greater focus on these groups in empirical work because their interests are left unattended by policymakers (Hickman, 2000; O’Keefe-Vigneron, 2003; Parekh, 2000).

While debate and discussion around disparities and other signs of possible prejudice in the police and CJS has often centred on ethnic minorities; in particular, young black and mixed

176 races males, there is a body of literature that provides indicators that immigrant-origin whites have been subject to less favourable treatment by police (James, 2006; Phillips & Bowling, 2017; Waddington, Stenson & Don, 2004). For instance, an older investigation noted that the Irish in low-income neighbourhoods had been overrepresented amongst those stopped and searched by police, whereas black Africans were amongst those who were least likely to be stopped by law enforcement (Young, 1994). Other research has explored controversial tactics and methods used by police when dealing with Traveller communities. These have involved using so-called ‘guerrilla tactics’ designed to de-stabilise, disrupt and spatially exclude New Travellers, either to control them within a certain space or move them on to different sites (James, 2006). Similar tactics involve surprise ‘raids’ on Traveller sites which are carried out with the stated aim of locating drugs and stolen goods (James, 2006, 2012).

Such findings indicate that these disparities are not necessarily due to a person’s ethnicity or race (Waddington, Stenson & Don, 2004). Minority white groups such as Irish and Jews have been said to have been subject to racial ‘othering’; indeed, there has been a perception that varying shades or degrees of whiteness are significant (Smith, 2014). With these points in mind, it, therefore, seems apparent that more work needs to be done to explore the experiences of white people from an immigrant background in regard to crime and the authorities so as to gain a more detailed picture of the interests of these individuals (see, e.g., Phillips & Bowling, 2017). Moreover, given that, at the time of the 2011 Census, three million people from ‘Other White’ backgrounds were residing in the United Kingdom, a figure constituting five per cent of the national population (Ibid.), it seems justified that individuals who form this demographic feature more prominently in empirical research focusing on criminal activity and law enforcement. Research into the UK’s immigrant-origin population would greatly benefit from data which disaggregates the white category so that the interests of white minorities in relation to crime and the CJS can be more easily identified and better understood. This would greatly assist both this research and other research.

Further examination of immigrant-origin white individuals may reveal that their interests do not differ significantly from those of indigenous Britons. In this case, more extensive research may not assist this investigation; however, until this is done then our understanding is more limited.

177

How did MPs discuss crime and the CJS in their parliamentary questions?

This section of the chapter identifies and examines the type of words and language used by MPs when discussing matters related to crime in their parliamentary questions. It does so, as in the other chapters, through the use of collocation.

The following tables list collocates for the word ‘crime’ in MPs’ parliamentary questions, which, as discussed previously, provide an indication of the context(s) in which the search word, in this case, ‘crime’ appears. As is the case in other chapters, each of the collocates present in the tables below is listed in descending order according to the mutual information (MI) scores they received. Supplementary data on collocates presented in this chapter are provided later in Appendix III.

Turning to Table 7.1, which includes collocates for crime in questions tabled by native and immigrant-origin MPs, it can be noted that most collocates presented here are somewhat generic, such as ‘organised’ and ‘humanity’. This demonstrates that MPs, regardless of whether they come from a recent immigrant family background or not, are more likely to refer to crime(s) against humanity and crime(s) of an organised nature when discussing ‘crime’ in their parliamentary questions. The word ‘commissioners’ may appear to be something of an anomaly; however, its presence is due to the introduction of police and crime commissioners during the 2010-15 Parliament, directly-elected posts that were a policy of the Conservative- Liberal Democrat coalition government.

A particularly notable and relevant finding in this text-based analysis is that the word ‘hate’ co-occurred strongly with ‘crime’ in questions tabled by both native and immigrant-origin MPs. The reason for its high mutual information score is due to the fact that, in virtually all cases, ‘hate’ is the word immediately preceding ‘crime’. This indicates that MPs, both native and of immigrant-origin, have, at least in part, substantively represented the interests of I.O. individuals in relation to crime. However, as was the case in the earlier Health chapter, this finding could have likewise been driven by a low number of immigrant-origin MPs asking a proportionally large number of questions containing the word ‘crime’, such as Priti Patel (Con, Witham) and Dominic Raab (Con, Esher & Walton).

Ethnic minorities, who constitute a sizeable proportion of Britain’s immigrant-origin population, have been at greater risk of racially-motivated hate crimes than white people (Corcoran, Lader & Smith, 2015). In addition, there has been a fairly persistent belief among ethnic minorities that the crime(s) committed against them were, in general, racially motivated (Bowling, Parmar & Phillips, 2003; Fitzgerald & Hale, 1996). The British

178

government defines a hate crime as ‘any criminal offence which is perceived, by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice towards someone based on a personal characteristic’. 48 There are five strands of hate crime currently monitored by UK authorities: race or ethnicity, religion or beliefs, sexual orientation, disability and transgender identity. Data from recent years shows that the vast majority of reported hate crimes in the United Kingdom are of a racial nature (Corcoran & Smith, 2016).

Table 7. 1. Collocates for crime in questions tabled by Native & I.O. MPs Native humanity, hate, organised, proceeds, scene, gun, knife, wildlife, violent, drug-related Immigrant-origin humanity, proceeds, hate, gun, organised, war, wildlife, homophobic, serious, commissioners

When the text of MPs’ questions are disaggregated by MPs’ ethnicity (Table 7.2), we note similarities with words such as ‘organised’ and ‘commissioners’ frequently appeared in close proximity to mentions of the word ‘crime’. However, the table reveals that, in questions tabled by white British and BAME Members, ‘hate’ frequently appears alongside crime while, interestingly, ‘hate’ fails to appear as one of the most co-occurring collocates in questions tabled by white immigrant-origin MPs. This could suggest that MPs from a white immigrant background demonstrated that they were the MPs who were least inclined to substantively represent the interests of I.O. communities in regard to crime. A possible explanation for this could be that white I.O. MPs, as was alluded to in the Introduction chapter, do not see themselves as representing the interests of others from a migratory background.

Likewise, the word ‘gun’ co-occurs strongly with crime in questions originating from both BAME parliamentarians and white British MPs, albeit to a slightly weaker extent in questions tabled by the latter. By contrast, ‘gun’ does not appear among the words that co-occur most powerfully with ‘crime’ in questions that were tabled by white immigrant-origin MPs. As gun crime has been shown to affect individuals of black ethnicity disproportionately (Phillips & Bowling, 2017), BAME and white British MPs greater tendency to discuss guns in relation to crime this may indicate that MPs from these backgrounds were more likely to have provided substantive representation to I.O. individuals. Yet, the presence of ‘gun’ may, in this instance, be in fact due to the large volume questions featuring ‘crime’ that originated from a few

48 Official Statistics: Hate crime, England and Wales, 2015 to 2016 https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/hate-crime-england-and-wales-2015-to-2016 (accessed 24 August 2017).

179

ethnic minority MPs; namely, Chi Onwurah (Lab, Newcastle upon Tyne Central), Sadiq Khan (Lab, Tooting) and the aforementioned Priti Patel.

Table 7. 2. Collocates for crime in questions tabled by White British, I.O. White & BAME MPs White British humanity, hate, organised, proceeds, scene, gun, knife, wildlife, violent, drug-related I.O. White proceeds, war, organised, serious, committed, victims, against, agency, police, act BAME hate, gun, organised, commissioners, war, percentage, victims, serious, cyber, committed

In the following part of this chapter’s text-based analysis, collocates were gathered for ‘justice system’ in questions tabled by both native and immigrant-origin MPs respectively (Table 7.3). Here, the search term ‘justice system’ was used as opposed to ‘criminal justice system’ because MPs used both terms in their parliamentary questions. Therefore, by adopting ‘justice system’, SketchEngine would locate collocates for both of these terms. While the two sets of collocates, broadly speaking, differ from one another, many of the words found in both sets are words typically associated with a country’s justice system. For example, ‘criminal’ is, unsurprisingly, among the words that co-occurred strongly with ‘justice system’ as MPs often referred to the criminal justice system in their questions.

Table 7. 3. Collocates for justice system in questions tabled by Native & I.O. MPs Native protects, treats, modernise, serbian, translators, criminal, listening, addressing, operates, confidence Immigrant-origin lucian, entered, criminal, referral, youth, language, left, first, cases, time

The following stage of the analysis involved observing collocates for ‘justice system’ in questions tabled by MPs from different ethnic backgrounds (Table 7.4). Once again, all sets of collocates contain words that one would generally assume would appear next to or close to ‘justice system’ in a body of text, such as ‘criminal’, ‘users’ and ‘entered’. This could thus suggest that the MPs from certain ethnic backgrounds were no more likely to have provided

180

substantive representation than MPs of a different ethnicity when it came to the criminal justice system.

Table 7. 4. Collocates for justice system in questions tabled by White British, I.O. White & BAME MPs White British protects, treats, modernise, serbian, translators, criminal, listening, addressing, operates, confidence I.O. White fantasising, interpreting, better, users, criminal, prisons, protect, comparative, therapies, facilities BAME lucian, entered, referral, criminal, youth, language, left, first, time, 3

To conclude, the above sets of collocates indicate that the ways in which MPs addressed matters relating to crime and the justice system in their questions were largely similar. Where there was a noticeable difference, however, was where white British and BAME MPs demonstrated a greater likelihood of making reference to ‘hate’ and ‘gun’ when discussing crime in their parliamentary questions compared to I.O. white MPs. Although both ‘hate’ and ‘gun’ registered high levels of co-occurrence with ‘crime’ in questions tabled by both native and I.O. MPs, this could indicate that, in regard to both hate and gun crime, the substantive representation of these interests were not evenly represented among I.O. MPs during the 2010-15 Parliament.

Were immigrant-origin MPs more likely to table questions in the interests of I.O. individuals?

This section of the chapter examines the likelihood that immigrant-origin MPs submitted more questions addressing crime relative to native British MPs. It begins by providing details about the variables used in the subsequent regression analyses. The latter part of the section presents and discusses the results observed in the regression models.

Dependent Variables

This chapter uses two count dependent variables. The first of which is referred to as I.O. Crime and it aims to measure MPs’ responsiveness through their parliamentary questions to

181 the types of crime about which immigrant-origin individuals have expressed concerns and or crimes which have disproportionately affected sections of the immigrant-origin population relative to native Britons. The following two questions have been included here because they are illustrative of the types of questions which address topics pertaining to I.O. Crime.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment she has made of (a) long-term crime rates and (b) long-term fear of crime rates.

- Chris Ruane (Lab, Vale of Clwyd) 24/02/2011.

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what his policy is on employment protection for people bereaved by a homicide.

- Priti Patel (Con, Witham) 01/07/2013.

As in other chapters, this variable has been formed by using the search term approach to identify questions before registering the number of questions tabled by each MP relating to I.O. Crime in a second dataset. Like the other search term dictionaries used in this dissertation, further data on this particular dictionary can be found in Appendix II.

The second dependent variable, which is referred to as CJS, has a more specific focus as it seeks to assess how immigrant-origin MPs have substantively represented the interests of immigrant-origin individuals in relation to possible injustices, disparities and bias in the criminal justice system. This variable was likewise created by using a set of relevant search terms (see Appendix II) to identify and code questions relating to this topic such as ‘remanded in police custody’, ‘stop and search’ and ‘Macpherson Report’. Examples of questions that have been coded this way are as follows:

To ask the Attorney General what recent assessment he has made of the performance of the crown prosecution service in cases involving deaths in police custody or after contact with the police.

- Jeremy Corbyn (Lab, Islington North) 21/10/2012.

182

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what measures she is taking to address concerns in the African/Caribbean community about the use of stop and search; and if she will make a statement.

- Charles Walker (Con, Broxbourne) 11/01/2014.

Next, as has been done in previous chapters, a series of descriptive statistics relating to the two dependent variables used in this chapter and the binary I.O. MP and BAME MP independent variables are presented (see Table 7.5). As noted in this table, a total of 385 questions relating to I.O. Crime were tabled by MPs during the 2010-15 Parliament while a total of 53 questions pertaining to CJS were tabled by MPs during this Parliament. Beginning with I.O. Crime, the chi-square tests note that its relationship with both of these independent variables is statistically significant, demonstrating that the relationship between I.O. Crime and both of these independent variables did not come about by chance.

Meanwhile, the chi-square tests concerning CJS observe that the association between the chapter’s other dependent variable and the I.O. MP independent variable was not found to be statistically significant. However, the relationship between this dependent variable and the BAME MP independent variable was found to be statistically significant. Consequently, the null hypothesis in regard to this latter association can be rejected.

183

Table 7. 5. I.O. Crime & CJS related-questions – total numbers and column percentages Other Question Question explicitly Total related to I.O. Crime

Native MP 157,898 (82.60%) 294 (76.36%) 158,192 (82.58%)

I.O. MP 33,270 (17.40%) 91 (23.64) 33,361 (17.42%)

Total 191,168 (100.00%) 385 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00%) Pearson chi ² = 10.38 p = 0.001 Other Question Question explicitly Total related to CJS

Native MP 158,151 (82.59%) 41 (77.36%) 158,192 (82.58%)

I.O. MP 33,349 (17.41%) 12 (22.64%) 33,361 (17.42%)

Total 191,500 (100.00%) 53 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00%) Pearson chi ² = 1.01 p = 0.32 Other Question Question explicitly Total related to I.O. Crime

White MP 176,756 (92.46%) 320 (83.12%) 177,076 (92.44%)

BAME MP 14,412 (7.54%) 65 (16.88%) 14,477 (7.56%)

Total 191,168 (100.00%) 385 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00%) Pearson chi ² = 48.02 p = 0.00 Other Question Question explicitly Total related to CJS

White MP 177,033 (92.45%) 43 (81.13%) 177,076 (92.44%)

BAME MP 14,467 (7.55%) 10 (18.87%) 14,477 (7.56%)

Total 191,500 (100.00%) 53 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00%)

Pearson chi ² = 9.71 p = 0.00 Source: Author’s own.

Independent & Control Variables

A number of the variables that are employed in other chapters, such as the I.O. and BAME dummy variables are likewise used in this chapter. The Labour dummy variable used earlier has been included in this chapter’s analysis as high-crime constituencies are overwhelmingly represented by Labour MPs. Given that crime is a greater issue affecting these constituencies, it is thought that Members from the Labour Party will have exhibited a greater inclination to table questions addressing crime.

184

In addition, four new independent variables have been introduced. The first of these is a dummy variable (Right-wing Party MP) that codes MPs belonging to right of centre parties as ‘1’ and MPs of other political parties as ‘0’. 49 Typically, parties on the right of the spectrum have been associated, to a greater extent, with the issue of crime; in particular, these parties have been the ones that have been vocal about the need to be ‘tough on crime’ and have advocated robust jail sentences and other penalties for criminals. The Conservative Party has generally been associated with favouring a tougher approach to crime compared to Labour (Quinn, 2008). Although analysis of Tory and Labour manifestos between 1997 and 2005 observed a convergence on issues such as law and order between the two parties (Bara, 2006; Bara & Budge, 2001; Quinn, 2008), many Labour and Tory MPs may continue to adopt ‘traditional’ left and right approaches to crime and law and order.

As in other policy area chapters, the Relevant Experience/Knowledge variable is a dummy variable which observes whether or not MPs have experience or knowledge relevant to the policy area addressed in the chapter, either before or during his or her parliamentary career (0=no, 1=yes). In this chapter, MPs who were employed in occupations such as the law (e.g., solicitor, barrister), law lecturer or probation officer before entering Parliament have been coded this way as have MPs who sat on either the Home Affairs or Justice Select Committee for longer than they sat on other committees. Lastly, as is the case in other chapters, MPs who were members of related APPGs such as Victims of Crime and Policing were deemed to have relevant experience or knowledge of crime and the CJS and so are thus coded accordingly.

The third of these new independent variables has been created by coding constituencies based on how rural or urban each is judged to be according to national statistics. The more urbanised constituencies receive the value of ‘1’ whereas more rural constituencies are coded as ‘0’. 50 This variable has been included in the models because many of the higher- crime areas are concentrated in urban areas and so it is theorised that MPs who represent these constituencies will have demonstrated a greater tendency to table questions pertaining to crime and criminal activity than MPs in more rural constituencies. Further details on these independent variables can be found below in Table 7.6.

49 Parties in the 2010-15 Parliament that were coded as ‘right-wing’ were the Conservative, UK Independence (UKIP), Democratic Unionist (DUP) and Ulster Unionist (UUP) Parties. 50 Government statistics rank constituencies on a scale from 1 ‘mainly rural’ to 6 ‘urban with major conurbation’. For more information see https://ons.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=1858f82f2e6d4f28bbf1952fd5973bff (accessed 14 June 2018). As noted in the text above, these categories have been amended in this study - more ‘rural’ constituencies (coded as ‘0’) are those ranked from 1-3 according to this scale whereas more ‘urbanised’ constituencies (coded as ‘1’) are those ranked from 4-6 on this scale.

185

Furthermore, Members of Parliament who represent seats with high levels of crime may take more active steps in addressing crime than colleagues who represent parts of the country where crime is less prevalent. Therefore, the last of these new independent variables gives the average number of reported crimes in each constituency between December 2010 and March 2015 using reported crime figures gathered on a month-by-month basis. 51 Finally, two control variables are used that are unique to this chapter. These record the number of questions that were submitted by MPs that did not relate to I.O. Crime and CJS respectively.

Table 7. 6. Independent & Control Variables (Descriptive Statistics) Variable N Mean Standard Minimum Maximum Deviation Right-wing Party MP 669 0.47 0.50 0 1 (dummy)

Relevant 669 0.16 0.37 0 1 Experience/Knowledge (dummy)

Rural/Urban 669 0.66 0.48 0 1 categorisation of constituency (dummy)

Reported incidents of 609 924.88 449.45 257 5523 crime

Qs not relating to I.O. 669 286.03 401.62 0 4034 Crime

Qs not relating to CJS 669 286.6 402.74 0 4045 Source: Author’s own.

Results

The results from the first set of regression models are displayed in Table 7.7, each of which uses I.O Crime as the dependent variable. As I.O. Crime is an overdispersed count variable, negative binomial regression has been adopted in each of the following models found in this table.

51 Data were taken from December 2010 as opposed to May 2010 (the advent of the 2010-15 Parliament) because data from Northern Ireland were only available from December 2010. These crime data were obtained from UK CrimeStats https://ukcrimestats.com/Membership/ (accessed 12 May 2019).

186

The first model (1a) is a baseline model and includes the dummy Immigrant-origin MP variable in addition to the three control variables detailed earlier in the Methods chapter. In it, we find that an MP’s background had neither a positive nor a negative effect on their likelihood of tabling questions relating to I.O. Crime, although this particular result is not statistically significant. Consequently, we are unable to confirm or disprove the earlier hypothesis (H1) which predicted a positive relationship between the variables.

In creating the second model (1b), the earlier baseline model (1a) was expanded to include the dummy rural/urban variable and the continuous Constituency crime levels variable. The model observes a slight, albeit statistically insignificant, inverse relationship between the dependent variable and the immigrant-origin independent variable. Hence, H1 cannot be completely rejected. Other results indicate that there was a modest positive relationship between more urban constituencies and the tabling of questions relevant to I.O. Crime. Meanwhile, the level of reported crime in a constituency, however, had only a neutral effect; yet, in both cases, the result was not statistically significant.

The final model, Model 1c, incorporates a more comprehensive set of independent variables. It notes a negative, albeit statistically insignificant relationship between the I.O. dummy variable and the dependent variable. Conversely, the model finds a fairly strong association between the dummy BAME variable and the dependent variable that is significant at the ten per cent level. In a similar fashion, the variable observing relevant past or current experience and or knowledge among MPs is also positive and significant. Meanwhile, the two binary partisanship independent variables (Labour MP and Right-wing Party MP) suggest that Members from both the Labour Party and from a party on the political right showed a greater inclination to table questions than non-Labour and non-centre right Members respectively, yet both results are not significant. Meanwhile, the levels of cosmopolitanism in parliamentary constituencies appeared to have had no effect on MPs’ likelihood of tabling questions concerning I.O. Crime, as indicated by the result for the Constituency Cosmopolitanism variable, although this result is not significant. Next, the association between the I.O. Crime and the rural/urban dummy variable is slightly positive but not statistically significant. Conversely, the relationship between constituency crime levels and the dependent variable is neutral, a result that is significant at the ten per cent level. Both results thus challenge claims outlined in H3. Finally, Marginality registers a neutral result, yet this is also not statistically significant.

187

Table 7. 7. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to I.O. Crime Dependent Variable I.O. Crime I.O. Crime I.O. Crime Model 1a Model 1b Model 1c Independent Variables

Immigrant-origin MP 0.98 (0.27) 0.87 (0.23) 0.60 (0.22) (dummy)

BAME MP (dummy) 2.23 (1.07) *

Labour MP (dummy) 1.39 (0.71)

Right-wing Party MP 1.49 (0.75) (dummy)

Relevant 1.58 (0.39) * Experience/Knowledge (dummy)

Constituency 0.99 (0.01) Cosmopolitanism

Rural/urban 1.05 (0.31) 1.05 (0.31) categorisation of constituency (dummy)

Constituency crime 1.00 (0.00) 1.00 (0.00) * levels

Marginality 1.00 (0.01)

Qs not relating to I.O. 1.00 (0.00) *** 1.00 (0.00) *** 1.00 (0.00) *** Crime

Ministerial Service 0.97 (0.01) ** 0.97 (0.01) ** 0.97 (0.01) ** (months)

Service as MP during 1.04 (0.02) 1.04 (0.03) * 1.04 (0.03) 2010-15 Parliament (months) Constant 0.19 (0.03) *** 0.01 (0.02) *** 0.01 (0.01) *** McFadden’s r² 0.13 0.14 0.15 N 669 669 669 *p<0.1 **p<0.05 ***p<0.01 Incidence Rate Ratios (robust standard errors clustered around Name of MP in brackets).

188

Next, the results from the three regression models that have used CJS as their dependent variable are presented in Table 7.8. Like the first dependent variable, CJS is also an overdispersed count variable and so negative binomial regression has been employed in each of the following models. The first model (2a) serves as a baseline model and consists of the immigrant-origin dummy variable alongside several control variables detailed previously in this chapter and in the Modelling Strategy outlined in Chapter 3. The model indicates that the relationship between immigrant heritage and the tabling of a higher number of questions pertaining to CJS among MPs is negative and statistically insignificant; therefore, the chapter’s first hypothesis (H1) can neither be confirmed nor invalidated.

The second model (2b), meanwhile, again includes the binary I.O. MP variable in addition to the rural/urban constituency variable and the variable registering constituency crime levels. This model likewise indicates that Members from an immigrant background were less likely to table questions than native MPs. However, this result is not, as shown in the table, statistically significant. In addition, Model 2b observes that MPs from urbanised constituencies were considerably more inclined to ask questions relevant to CJS than their colleagues in more rural seats, a finding that is statistically significant at the ten per cent level. Lastly, the variable recording constituency crime levels registered neither a positive nor a negative association with the dependent variable that is statistically significant at five per cent.

Like the equivalent models found in other chapters, the third and final model (2c) includes, a more varied set of independent variables. Starting with the first independent variable, the I.O. MP dummy variable, we can see that Model 2c observes a fairly strong, albeit statistically insignificant inverse relationship between having immigrant heritage and the tabling of questions relating to CJS. Yet, as this result is not statistically significant, there is no evidence to affirm or reject the prediction outlined earlier in H1. Next, Model 2c notes a strong positive, although statistically insignificant relationship between having non-European ethnicity and the tabling of questions relating to CJS among MPs. Consequently, the chapter’s second hypothesis cannot be accepted or rejected. Additionally, the results for the Labour MP and Relevant Experience/Knowledge dummy variables similarly indicate a moderate positive association between these two explanatory variables and the dependent variable. Yet due to their lack of statistical significance, these result cannot, however, be validated.

Turning next to the Constituency Cosmopolitanism variable, we can see from Table 7.8 that there was some evidence that the likelihood of submitting questions pertaining to CJS is higher in more diverse, a result that is statistically significant at ten per cent (IRR = 1.04 p =<0.1). This model also suggests that representing a more urbanised constituency greatly

189

increased MPs’ likelihood of tabling questions relating to CJS. However, this result is not statistically significant. Lastly, constituency crime levels and the size of MPs’ electoral majorities appeared to have had registered a neutral effect on MPs’ likelihood of tabling more questions addressing CJS. However, these results were also not found to be statistically significant.

Table 7. 8. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to CJS Dependent Variable CJS CJS CJS Model 2a Model 2b Model 2c Independent Variables

Immigrant-origin MP 0.69 (0.43) 0.66 (0.39) 0.37 (0.31) (dummy)

BAME MP (dummy) 2.87 (2.81)

Labour MP (dummy) 1.45 (0.82)

Relevant 1.20 (0.59) Experience/Knowledge (dummy)

Constituency 1.04 (0.02) * Cosmopolitanism

Rural/urban 4.90 (4.59) * 3.79 (3.47) categorisation of constituency (dummy)

Constituency crime 1.00 (0.001) 1.00 (0.001) levels

Marginality 0.99 (0.02)

Qs not relating to CJS 1.00 (0.00) *** 1.00 (0.00) *** 1.00 (0.00) ***

Ministerial Service 0.98 (0.02) 1.00 (0.02) 0.99 (0.02) (months) Constant 0.04 (0.01) *** 0.01 (0.01) *** 0.02 (0.02) *** McFadden’s r² 0.04 0.07 0.08 N 669 669 669 *p<0.1 **p<0.05 ***p<0.01 Incidence Rate Ratios (robust standard errors clustered around Name of MP in brackets).

190

Discussion

As has been discussed throughout this dissertation, normative literature on representation has affirmed that minority and or underrepresented groups will have their interests best represented by legislators whom they descriptively represent. In relation to this chapter, this normative assumption would suggest that MPs who come from an immigrant background will have demonstrated a greater tendency to substantively represent the interests of immigrant- origin members of the public in relation to crime and the criminal justice system compared to native British parliamentarians in their parliamentary questions.

Beginning with a discussion of the findings from the corpus linguistics analysis in the earlier part of the chapter, it is observed; through the above collocate tables that both native and immigrant-origin MPs used similar language when discussing matters relating to crime in their parliamentary questions. This challenges the notion that descriptive and substantive representation for minority groups, in this case, individuals of immigrant-origin, are intrinsically linked. However, other findings suggest that, in relation to certain types of crime, certain immigrant-origin MPs may have been more inclined to highlight these issues through their parliamentary questions. For instance, while the words ‘hate’ and ‘crime’ did not co- occur strongly in questions submitted by white immigrant-origin MPs, the chapter notes that these two words appeared in close proximity to one another in questions tabled by BAME MPs. Similarly, in questions tabled by BAME MPs, the word ‘gun’ co-occurs powerfully with ‘crime’. This could likewise be interpreted as evidence of substantive representation, given its relevance to people with black ethnicity in particular, who are more likely to be victims of gun crime than people of other ethnicities.

The regression models presented in the latter half of the chapter likewise produce similar results to those observed in earlier chapters. Models 1a - 1c indicate that immigrant-origin MPs were less likely to table questions relating to I.O. Crime during the 2010-15 Parliament than native British Members; however, in each instance the result was not statistically significant. On the other hand, BAME MPs’ demonstrated a greater likelihood of submitting questions relevant to I.O. Crime than white MPs, a result that was found to statistically significant. This demonstrates that a subgroup of immigrant-origin MPs was more inclined to have substantively represented the interests of I.O. individuals in relation to crime.

Furthermore, while it was hypothesised (see H3) that local factors would induce MPs to substantively represent immigrant-origin individuals relating to crime, the above findings paint a different picture. MPs representing more urbanised parliamentary seats appeared to be no more likely than MPs representing more rural communities to table questions pertaining to I.O. Crime. In addition, the models included in Table 7.7 suggest that the levels

191 of reported crime in a constituency had neither a positive nor a negative effect on the dependent variable. Both, however, were not statistically significant; therefore, H3 can be neither affirmed nor rejected.

Overall, the lack of results which are statistically significant at either the ten or five per cent levels in these models (Table 7.7) means that it is more difficult to make assessments, from these results and others, about the substantive representation of the interests of immigrant- origin individuals in relation to crime. Consequently, the null hypothesis (i.e. there is not a positive relationship between an MP’s immigrant background and the tabling of questions relating to crime) cannot be rejected. Hence, as has been seen in other chapters, these data make it more difficult for us to make solid conclusions about the link between descriptive and substantive representation.

The chapter’s investigation into whether immigrant-origin MPs were more likely to draw attention towards and therefore substantively represent issues relating to possible examples of bias or unfairness in the criminal justice system produces similar findings. The regression models displayed in Table 7.8 indicate that immigrant-origin Members were again less likely to have submitted questions relevant to CJS than native MPs. However, as none of these particular results was statistically significant, this cannot be confirmed. The greater likelihood of BAME MPs tabling more questions relevant to CJS could be attributed to the fact that these issues are often discussed in relation to ethnic minorities. Moreover, stereotyping and discrimination in the criminal justice system are frequently talked about in regard to ethnic minorities and the apparent impact that these have had on ethnic minority communities. Therefore, it would be reasonable to hypothesise that BAME Members would be the parliamentarians who showed the greater tendency to table questions of this variety, as they feel, possibly as a result of group consciousness, more compelled to address these issues.

According to Model 2b, representing a more urbanised constituency was clearly an important factor, significant at ten per cent, that MPs would table questions relevant to this dependent variable. This suggests that matters pertaining to the CJS are more salient to city-based MPs as opposed to MPs in rural areas. Furthermore, this may mean that MPs are more inclined to use issues relating to the CJS to determine the interests of their constituents and other members of the public than general crime statistics. However, when a broader range of independent variables is included, as was the case in Model 2c, this particular result ceases to be statistically significant. Meanwhile, as was the case in the results for I.O. Crime, levels of reported crime in a constituency had virtually no effect on MPs’ likelihood of submitting questions on these subjects, although these results were not found to be statistically significant. To summarise, most of the results registered in these models are not statistically significant at either ten or five per cent, rendering it more difficult to make adequate

192 summations about the results as a whole. Therefore, as was the case for I.O. Crime, the null hypothesis cannot be rejected as these data prevent us from making more comprehensive conclusions about the link between descriptive and substantive representation in regard to the I.O. population and crime and the criminal justice system.

Conclusion

This chapter has continued this dissertation’s investigation into whether immigrant-origin MPs have been more inclined to substantively represent the interests of immigrant-origin members of the public by examining the extent to which immigrant-origin MPs were responsive to the interests of immigrant-origin individuals in relation to crime and the criminal justice system.

The results presented in this chapter document no evidence that MPs from an immigrant background demonstrated a higher tendency to substantively represent the interests of I.O. communities in relation to crime and the CJS. Coming from an ethnic minority background was, meanwhile, a strong predictor that an MP would submit a higher volume of questions addressing types of crime which research indicates has had a disproportionate effect on immigrant communities. However, this finding did not apply when it came to questions regarding the CJS.

Furthermore, analysis of the text of parliamentary questions has demonstrated that MPs from an immigrant background did not differ from native MPs in the types of words and language that they used when discussing crime and the CJS, thus challenging the notion that a link has existed between descriptive and substantive representation. However, in questions tabled by BAME MPs, ‘hate’ and ‘gun’ were more likely to appear alongside or close to the word ‘crime’. These words were present among the words that registered higher levels of co-occurrence with crime in questions submitted by white British MPs but not in I.O. white MPs’ questions. This indicates that, as mentioned earlier in the chapter, these specific crime interests were represented unevenly among MPs from an immigrant background.

Similar to other results presented in other chapters, the findings presented in this chapter suggest that local factors, when found to be statistically significant, did not have a marked effect on the likelihood that MPs would submit questions relevant to either of the dependent variables. Levels of constituency diversity and levels of reported crime both registered neutral effects, although there is some evidence (Model 2b) that the location of an MP’s

193 constituency had a noticeable effect; it was observed that MPs serving more urbanised seats were more likely to submit questions relevant to CJS.

In summary, the findings presented here would suggest that, contrary to theoretical expectations, there is a lack of evidence to show that immigrant-origin MPs were more likely to substantively represent I.O. interests in regard to crime and the CJS than their native British parliamentary colleagues. This chapter does, however, observe a similar pattern to that which has been noted elsewhere in the dissertation; namely, ethnic minority Members demonstrated a greater tendency to substantively represent the interests of the immigrant- origin population. However, as alluded to above, this particular pattern is only consistent with regard to crime and did not extend to the CJS.

As the BAME Members who served during the 2010-15 Parliament were almost universally immigrant-origin according to our definition, this shows that a section of immigrant-origin parliamentarians was more likely to substantively represent I.O. interests in relation to crime. This finding once again indicates that ethnic origin is, in general, a stronger predictor of providing substantive representation than immigrant-origin status.

194

Chapter 8. Evidence of Substantive Representation in Different Policy Areas: The Labour Market

This dissertation’s fourth and final policy area chapter follows a similar format to the three that have preceded it. However, its objective, as indicated by the title and in references made to this chapter in earlier chapters, is to ascertain whether or not and the extent to which immigrant-origin MPs demonstrated a greater tendency to substantively represent the labour market interests of the UK’s immigrant-origin population.

As outlined towards the start of this thesis, immigrant-origin individuals experience and have experienced more difficulties and barriers when trying to access the labour market than native Britons (Frijters, Shields & Wheatley Price, 2005; Hatton & Tani, 2005). This has been observed as being more pronounced during economic downturns (Khattab & Fox, 2016). Over the course of recent decades, official statistics have shown that individuals from an immigrant background are more likely to be out of work than indigenous Britons (see, e.g., Berthoud, 2000; Currie, 2007; Heath & Cheung, 2007; Khattab & Fox, 2016). This ‘gap’ in employment has been attributed to the former having lower levels of cultural capital and knowledge of the British labour market, and in some cases, having lower English language skills (Clark & Drinkwater, 2007). Yet, research has also demonstrated that this disparity may be due, in part, to discrimination on the part of employers (Currie, 2007; Heath & Cheung, 2007).

Meanwhile, immigrant-origin individuals who are in employment are, as this chapter will go on to document in further detail, more likely to face possible disadvantages relative to and or have interests which differ from those of native Britons. In some immigrant communities, for instance, levels of part-time and non-permanent forms of employment are higher than in other communities (Nazroo & Kapadia, 2013b). Similarly, levels of self-employment in sectors where failure rates among businesses are more common are higher than average among certain immigrant groups than in the UK population at large (Clark & Drinkwater, 2007).

Consequently, efforts to reduce unemployment and to provide assistance to those who are out of work are in the interests of immigrant-origin individuals. Members who tabled questions on reducing unemployment and helping individuals enter the labour market are, therefore, deemed to have acted in the labour market interests of I.O. individuals. Similarly,

195 initiatives and measures to assist people who are in work, for example, those who are self- employed or are in part-time work, can also be seen as being in the interests of individuals of immigrant-origin. MPs who tabled proportionally more questions addressing matters concerning those who are in employment can, therefore, also be judged to have substantively represented the interests of the UK’s immigrant-origin population in regard to the labour market.

This chapter, like its earlier counterparts, pursues two lines of enquiry. The first of which measures I.O. MPs’ ‘responsiveness’ to what it sometimes refers to as the ‘out of work’ interests of I.O individuals whereas the second, ascertains whether or not and the extent to which immigrant-origin MPs substantively represented the ‘in work’ interests of I.O. individuals. In its later Results section, the chapter observes that immigrant-origin MPs exhibited a lower tendency to table more questions concerning unemployment than native British MPs. Results from the second line of enquiry; however, indicate that I.O. MPs were no more likely than native MPs to have substantively represented these interests. However, this result was not found to be statistically significant.

Hypotheses

In exploring whether or not immigrant-origin MPs during the 2010-15 Parliament were more likely to have substantively represented the labour market interests of immigrant-origin individuals, this chapter investigates three hypotheses which are broadly similar to those that have featured in the previous chapters. As is the case in other chapters, H1 starts on the premise that the assumption made in normative literature regarding the link between descriptive and substantive representation is correct. Additionally, empirical research demonstrates that minority and or underrepresented groups have been substantively represented by descriptive representatives.

H1: Immigrant-origin MPs will have been found to have been more inclined to submit questions relating to the labour market interests of immigrant-origin members of the public than MPs who do not come from an immigrant background.

Meanwhile, the second hypothesis is adopted because it is theorised that BAME Members will have demonstrated a greater tendency to have substantively represented the labour market interests of immigrant-origin individuals relative to white Members of Parliament

196 because they are guided by a sense of group consciousness or solidarity to promote and to highlight issues that concern or predominantly pertain to minority ethnic communities. In this chapter, for example, it is thought that BAME MPs will have taken a greater interest in alleviating unemployment because BAME members of the public have traditionally been more likely to suffer from joblessness than white people from both a British and an immigrant background (Blackaby et al., 1997; Blackaby et al., 1999; Nazroo & Kapadia, 2013a). Among white immigrant-origin MPs, on the other hand, group consciousness is, as outlined in earlier chapters, predicted to be much weaker or even non-existent (Chong & Rogers, 2005). Therefore, it is expected that white I.O. MPs will have been less likely to have taken the same degree of interest in matters to do with the labour market as parliamentarians who belong to an ethnic minority.

H2: During the 2010-15 Parliament, parliamentarians with non-European ethnicity were more likely to table questions pertaining to the labour market interests of I.O. individuals than MPs of white European ethnicity.

The third hypothesis predicts that, like its equivalents in previous chapters have done, that local factors will have had an effect on the types of questions that MPs will submit. In the case of this chapter, it is believed that MPs will have been more likely to have tabled questions concerning the labour market interests of I.O. individuals if he or she represented a constituency with higher levels of unemployment, self-employed and part-time workers.

H3: MPs who represented constituencies with high levels of unemployment, self- employment and part-time work plus low levels of educational attainment will have shown a greater tendency to table questions on the labour market interests of immigrant-origin individuals.

Accessing the Labour Market

It has been widely documented that individuals of immigrant-origin are, relative to the indigenous population, disadvantaged when trying to access the labour market (see, e.g., Catney & Sabater, 2015; Heath & Yu, 2005; Khattab & Fox, 2016). Data from the 2011 Census and the Labour Force Survey (LFS) shows that individuals from an immigrant background were, on average, less likely to be in or looking for work than white Britons

197

(Nazroo & Kapadia, 2013a). This is in spite of the fact that immigrants, including both recent and older arrivals to the United Kingdom, have possessed skills and qualifications which often mirror those of the indigenous workforce (Dustmann & Fabbri & Preston, 2005). In some cases, as noted by Frijters, Shields & Wheatley Price (2005), immigrants were found to be more likely to be in possession of a degree and less likely to have no educational qualifications than the native British. This is differential in levels of employment is not only a recent phenomenon, however, as older Census returns and LFS data observe that this trend has persisted over the course of recent decades (Blackaby et al., 1997; Blackaby et al., 1999).

When researchers allude to minorities’ disadvantage regarding access to the labour market, they often do so by making reference to the employment ‘gap’ that exists and persists between the indigenous British population and those from an immigrant background (see, e.g., Berthoud, 2000; Currie, 2007; Heath & Cheung, 2007; Khattab & Fox, 2016). The existence and persistence of this gap have been attributed to a number of different factors. Migrants and their families may have lower levels of human capital than native Britons, which is often understood to mean a lack of knowledge and ‘knowhow’ of the British labour market. First and foremost is fluency in English, which represents an important part of migrants’ human capital and employment prospects. Immigrant-origin individuals, particularly those belonging to the first generation, may lack a suitable level of English language proficiency which, in turn, reduces their levels of human capital and opportunities for employment. Dustmann & Fabbri (2003) estimate that fluency in the language increases the probability of employment by 22 per cent. This may go some way in explaining why, for instance, ethnic Pakistani and Bangladeshi women, who have lower levels of English language skills than other immigrant-origin individuals 52 are among the most disadvantaged when it comes to accessing the British labour market (Heath & Yu, 2005).

In other cases, various cultural factors, traditions and norms may prevent or discourage members from certain immigrant communities from seeking employment. Greater levels of adherence to traditional gender roles in British Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities, for example, mean that there is a greater expectation placed on females within these communities to be responsible for childcare and the wellbeing of elderly relatives and partners. Research conducted in Oldham, a town with sizeable British Pakistani and Bangladeshi communities and noted for its high levels of unemployment, economic inactivity and geographical segregation, observed that while educational attainment is regarded as

52 English Language Skills (2018) GOV.UK https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/british- population/demographics/english-language-skills/latest (accessed 4 March 2019).

198 important to members of these minority Asian communities, there is also a belief that ‘family honour’ should not be compromised. This creates difficulties for those families who support their female relatives in their pursuit of further education and careers (Dale et al., 2002). Finally, geography may have played and continues to play a role in the persistence of this gap. This is because immigrant communities are more likely to be concentrated in more socially deprived residential areas where employment opportunities are more scarce (Clark & Drinkwater, 2007).

At this stage in the chapter, it is, however, important to note that this disparity in labour market participation does not apply uniformly within and between different immigrant groups. Indeed, research has observed several noteworthy differences both within and between different immigrant groups and between males and females. For instance, data from the 2011 Census finds that unemployment was particularly high among certain ethnic groups and genders; namely, Gypsy/Traveller males and females, males of mixed white and Afro- Caribbean ethnicity and women of Bangladeshi and Pakistani origin (Catney & Sabater, 2015). The former have registered low levels of economic activity at all stages of life, especially among those who are married and have dependent children. Similarly, women in Arab and Gypsy/Traveller communities have had, for cultural reasons and language barriers, noticeably lower rates of labour market participation than males from the same ethnic background and both males and females belonging to different ethnic backgrounds (Dale et al., 2002; Nazroo & Kapadia, 2013a). Individuals of Pakistani and Bangladeshi origin, both male and female, have suffered from high levels of unemployment relative to the white population and other ethnic groups. Indeed, their relative disadvantage may be in part attributable to what has been termed a ‘Muslim penalty’ (Martin, Heath & Bosveld, 2010; Reynolds & Birdwell, 2015) just as minorities, in general, are thought to, as this section will go on to explore, encounter an ‘ethnic penalty’ when trying to find work. In contrast, British Indian women register higher levels of economic activity which are similar to those of white women.

Just as there are data that observe differences between and within different ethnic groups, there are other data that finds that unemployment rates among immigrant-origin individuals vary across local authorities in England and Wales. It has been noted that, across the country, there are concentrated pockets of unemployment for different immigrant-origin groups (Catney & Sabater, 2015). However, while factors such as lower levels of human capital, English language proficiency and residential location may explain part of this gap in employment between the indigenous Britons and individuals from an immigrant background, this differential continues to exist after factors such as age and experience are taken into account (see, e.g., Berthoud, 2000; Currie, 2007; Heath & Cheung, 2007; Khattab & Fox,

199

2016). This is evidenced by the disadvantage that individuals of the second generation face many of the difficulties that their parents’ generation faced, in spite of having been born and raised in the UK and possessing a British education and the advantage of fluency in English, therefore possessing higher levels of human capital than their parents’ generation.

Heath and Yu (2005) have, for instance, observed that members of the second generation in the 1990s had demonstrated no sign of improvement compared to the first generation migrants in the 1970s. This was found to be especially acute among people of Afro- Caribbean and Pakistani ethnicity who were twice as likely to be out of work as white Britons of the same age. This consistent disparity has led researchers to surmise that these disparities in the levels of employment are due to discrimination on the part of employers, who will overlook candidates with similar levels of education and experience in favour of ‘native’, or candidates with a ‘white’ sounding name (Berthoud, 2000; Heath & Cheung, 2007). The term ‘ethnic penalty’ has, therefore, been used to describe this phenomenon, wherein differences in employment cannot be explained by age or experience (Berthoud, 2000; Heath & Cheung, 2007).

To explore the concept of the ethnic penalty in greater depth, researchers have often conducted field experiments which have involved sending application letters for advertised jobs in matching pairs across a variety of different sectors from fictitious candidates with similar levels of education and experience. The only difference between the two sets of applicants, however, is that one set is assigned a white British-sounding name while the other is assigned a foreign, non-white sounding name (see, e.g., Di Stasio & Heath, 2019; Esmail & Everington, 1993; Wood et al., 2009). These studies observe a broadly similar trend; namely, a lower proportion of their fictitious minority candidates received job offers, obtained interviews or received more enthusiastic responses to their applications. At the same time, other research illustrates how the job interview process can disadvantage immigrant-origin individuals. Roberts and Campbell (2006) found that first-generation applicants fared less well during interviews as they found it more difficult to present themselves in ways in which they were expected to present themselves. In particular, there was a communication demand that often exceeded the requirements for the job, suggesting that job interviews created a ‘linguistic penalty’ for non-native speakers.

While the ethnic penalty is often thought to predominantly affect black, Asian and minority ethnic individuals, white immigrants face similar barriers, suggesting that white people from different backgrounds are similarly confronted by discrimination in the job market (Currie, 2007). Unfortunately, data on white immigrant communities beyond those of the first generation are more difficult to obtain. For instance, data concerning the British-Irish community, one of the largest immigrant-origin communities in the country, is limited owing

200 to the fact that ‘Irish’ was not included as a measure of ethnicity prior to the 2001 Census. Hence, this prevents us from making assessments on whether these disadvantages extend to the other white groups in a way that is comparable to British ethnic minorities (Heath & Yu, 2005).

As this section has demonstrated, individuals from an immigrant background have faced disadvantages when accessing the labour market. This chapter goes on to examine how responsive MPs have been to these disadvantages through their parliamentary questions.

‘In Work’ Disadvantages

As the preceding section documents, while there are ‘out of work’ disadvantages associated with individuals from an immigrant background, there are also ‘in work’ disadvantages pertaining to this demographic. For example, as noted earlier, immigrant-origin individuals are more likely to be concentrated in certain types of work; namely, self-employment and part-time work than the native British population. Therefore, the work-related interests of immigrant-origin individuals in the UK can differ from those of the indigenous population.

As the LFS 2010 data presented earlier in Chapter 4 has revealed, immigrant-origin individuals from certain backgrounds were more likely than native Britons to cite their inability to secure full-time work as the reason why they work part-time. This suggests that not only do individuals of immigrant-origin face additional barriers to entering full-time employment but also that they have less flexibility. Data from the same survey have also shown that individuals from an immigrant background, in particular individuals from a minority ethnic background, are proportionally more likely to be in temporary employment compared to native Britons.

Once again, it is important to note that differences do not apply across different immigrant- origin groups. For example, part-time work is prevalent among British Bangladeshi males (Nazroo & Kapadia, 2013b). Meanwhile, self-employment has tended to be favoured by British Asian males compared to other immigrant-origin groups, although younger, better educated UK-born ethnic minorities have shown a lower preponderance to be self-employed than their forebears (Clark & Drinkwater, 2007). Ethnic minorities who are self-employed are often concentrated in retail, catering and transport sectors where high business failure rates are more common (Ibid.). Moreover, in some cases, the decision to become self-employed may come as a result of being unable to find work as a paid employee caused by barriers such as discrimination (Catney & Sabater, 2015). In addition, individuals who are self- employed report working longer working hours than paid employees (Ibid.)

201

How did MPs discuss (un)employment in their parliamentary questions?

As in previous chapters, this section examines the types of words and language used by Members when discussing unemployment in their parliamentary questions during the 2010- 15 Parliament. To gather these data, ‘unemploy*’ is used as the search or ‘node’ word. The reason for using this word along with an asterisk was because similar to the use of ‘discrim*’ in Chapter 6, SketchEngine would identify collocates for both ‘unemployed’ and ‘unemployment’ within the parliamentary questions corpora.

When doing this, the words that were found to have strongly co-occurred with ‘unemploy*’ can be found in Tables 8.1 – 8.2. Collocates listed in the lower part of Table 8.1 are the words that strongly co-occur with mentions of the ‘unemploy*’ in the corpus of questions submitted by native and immigrant-origin MPs. The former group of MPs tended to use words generally associated with unemployment such as ‘youth’, ‘tackle’ and ‘level’.

Similarly, among the questions tabled by MPs from an immigrant background, terms that are typically used in discussions concerning unemployment, such as ‘levels’, ‘trends’ and ‘youth’ are present. An exception to this is the term ‘ladywood’ which refers to the constituency of Birmingham Ladywood and appears in the list of collocates because its MP, Shabana Mahmood (Lab), tabled several questions requesting information on unemployment in her constituency. Indeed, MPs’ questions relating to unemployment show that MPs will often request this sort of information about their constituencies and or the region or locality where the constituency is located.

These sets of collocates show that when discussing matters relating to unemployment during the 2010-15 Parliament, Members, irrespective of whether they were from an immigrant background or not, used similar language in the questions for written answer that they submitted to ministers. That being said, the collocates for unemploy* in tabled questions by I.O. MPs may have been influenced by Chris Ruane MP (Lab, Vale of Clwyd) who tabled a disproportionately very high number of questions containing unemploy* relative to other I.O. MPs.

202

Table 8. 1. Collocates for unemploy* in questions tabled by Native & I.O. MPs Native inactivity, classed, youth, long-term, graduate, among, prisoners, tackle, trends, 24 Immigrant-origin classed, long-term, youth, amongst, job, teachers, persons, trends, levels, young

In the next set of collocates (Table 8.2) the text of MPs’ questions has been disaggregated by MPs’ ethnicity. This allows us to examine the types of words used by MPs when referring to unemploy* in their parliamentary questions depending on which of the three broad ethnic groups to which they belong. Moreover, this chapter hypothesises that BAME MPs will have been more likely to have tabled questions relating to unemployment than white MPs, both native and immigrant-origin; which, if found to be correct, we might expect to find that ethnic minority MPs used words that were more ‘proactive’ in confronting unemployment, for example, ‘reduce’ and ‘tackle’. Instead, what Table 8.2 illustrates is that there is a degree of overlap between the types of words that are used by MPs from different ethnic backgrounds in the questions that they submit pertaining to unemployment, for example, ‘youth’ and ‘level(s)’. The presence of both ‘Ladywood’ and ‘Birmingham’ in questions tabled by ethnic minority Members is due, as noted above, to MPs requesting information on unemployment in those localities. Interestingly, however, ‘receipt’, ‘pay’ and ‘benefits’ all appear in the BAME list yet are absent from the lists for white British and white immigrant-origin MPs. This may indicate that MPs with non-white ethnicity discuss unemployment in a less ‘abstract’ sense than white MPs, as evidenced by the fact that these words are present. Moreover, unlike in other chapters, a small group of BAME MPs did not table a comparatively large volume of questions wherein unemploy* was present. Consequently, this renders it less likely that words such as ‘receipt’, ‘pay’ and ‘benefits’ are present because of the actions of a small handful of BAME MPs.

203

Table 8. 2. Collocates for unemploy* in questions tabled by White British, I.O. White & BAME MPs

White British inactivity, classed, youth, long-term, graduates, among, prisoners, tackle, trends, 24 I.O. White classed, youth, long-term, persons, prisoners, young, people, levels, rate, over BAME classed, levels, ladywood, youth, prisoners, pay, birmingham, date, latest, as

In the following two tables, the above process has been repeated, although this time ‘employ*’ was used as the node word in order to examine the types of language used by Members when discussing matters relating to employment and employees in their parliamentary questions.

In general, the lists of collocates present in Table 8.3 contain terms such as ‘hourly’, ‘non- permanent’ and ‘apprentices’, demonstrating that both native and immigrant-origin MPs often used technical and contractual terms when referring to employment and employees in their parliamentary questions. That being said, however, there are several notable differences between both sets of collocates. For example, terms such as ‘fixed-term’ co-occurred strongly with employ* in questions tabled by I.O. MPs. When discussed in relation to employment, the presence of ‘fixed-term’ in this collocate list could indicate that immigrant- origin MPs may have exhibited a greater inclination to substantively represent the ‘in work’ interests of I.O. individuals than native MPs owing to the greater likelihood of I.O. individuals to be in insecure work. Yet one should also consider, as has been done in previous chapters, that the presence of ‘fixed-term’ among this list of collocates may be driven by a minority of I.O. MPs, most notably Lisa Nandy (Lab, Wigan) and Chuka Umunna (Lab, Streatham) who submitted proportionally large numbers of questions to ministers containing ‘employ*’.

In both Tables 8.3 and 8.4, there are several collocates which require further clarification. First, ‘speechwriters’ is present due to questions inquiring as to the amount that government departments have spent on speechwriters and the number of speechwriters the department employs at each pay grade. ‘Cryptography’, meanwhile, refers to the export of equipment employing cryptography and cryptographic software. Next, ‘tinto’ appears because of the tabling of questions hoping to determine the status of the relationship between employees of different departments and Rio Tinto, an international mining company. Lastly, DSS is the acronym of the now-defunct Department of Social Security.

204

In Table 8.4, terms that appeared in close proximity to the words ‘employment’, ‘employed’ and ‘employees’ in questions tabled by MPs from different ethnic backgrounds are presented. As the lists in this table reveal, MPs from white British, I.O. white and BAME backgrounds used a number of terms and words that generally relate to employment, such as ‘hourly’ and ‘apprentices’. However, once again, it is noted that the nature of such words as ‘fixed-term’ and ‘zero-hours’ relate to the temporary nature of work which is, as documented in the above paragraph and earlier in the chapter, more likely to be experienced by individuals from an immigrant background. This may indicate that the greater likelihood to represent these interests was apparent among immigrant-origin MPs from both white and BAME backgrounds. However, we must, once again, be conscious of the fact that the presence of both of these terms has to some extent been driven by a very small group of BAME MPs, in this case, the aforementioned Nandy and Umunna, tabling relatively large numbers of parliamentary questions featuring ‘employ*’.

Table 8. 3. Collocates for employ* in questions tabled by Native & I.O. MPs Native non-permanent, cryptography, dss, desking, tinto, system’s, speechwriters, non-english, subcontracted, dues Immigrant-origin headquarter, centralised, fixed-term, specify, indirectly, according, hourly, shareholder, drafting, apprentices

Table 8. 4. Collocates for employ* in questions tabled by White British, I.O. White & BAME MPs White British non-permanent, cryptography, dss, desking, tinto, system, speechwriters, non-english, subcontracted, remissions I.O. White indirectly, centralised, headquarter, drafting, zero-hours, hourly, volunteer, principles, good, apprentices BAME main, according, specify, owner, fixed-term, shareholder, apprentices, contributory, represent, grades

This section has demonstrated is that the types of words and language used by MPs in conjunction with (un)employment did not tend to differ, irrespective of their family background and or ethnicity. However, the appearance of words relating to ‘unemploy*’, as discussed earlier, may suggest that BAME MPs raised matters relating to unemployment in

205 a less ‘abstract’ sense. Similarly, it was noted that ‘fixed-term’ and ‘zero-hours’ registered high levels of co-occurrence with ‘employ*’ in questions tabled by I.O. white and BAME MPs. Together, both of these findings could indicate that MPs from an immigrant background showed a greater tendency to substantively represent the labour market interests of I.O. individuals. However, like in earlier chapters, it is essential not to overestimate the significance of these text-based findings.

Were immigrant-origin MPs more likely to table questions in the interests of I.O. individuals?

This section of the chapter investigates how likely immigrant-origin MPs were to have tabled more questions related to both the out of work and in work interests of I.O. individuals. It initially details the types of variables used in the regression analyses before presenting and discussing the results in the regression models.

Dependent Variables

Two dependent count variables are used in this chapter. The first of these variables is referred to as Unemployment and seeks, as the name suggests, to ascertain the extent to which immigrant-origin MPs substantively represented the interests of the immigrant-origin population in regard to unemployment. It has been created by using, as outlined in the earlier Methods chapter, a series search term searches to identify questions that were deemed to sufficiently address unemployment using the criteria also outlined in this earlier chapter. The number of questions that each MP submitted that related to unemployment was entered into a separate dataset alongside other variables used in this analysis to form a count dependent variable.

Examples of questions that were considered to demonstrate substantive representation in relation to unemployment are the following submitted by Members Pamela Nash and Rehman Chishti:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what recent assessment he has made of the effect of fiscal policy on the level of long-term unemployment.

- Pamela Nash (Lab, Airdrie & Shotts) 21/06/2013.

206

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what estimate he has made of the effects of the benefits cap on reducing unemployment in (a) Medway and (b) Gillingham and Rainham constituency; and if he will make a statement.

- Rehman Chishti (Con, Gillingham & Rainham) 11/12/2014.

The second dependent variable, on the other hand, assesses how the interests of immigrant-origin individuals are represented in relation to individuals who are currently in work; specifically those in part-time work and those who are self-employed. This variable is also a count variable and has likewise been created by an identical process to the first and is henceforth referred to as Employment. All of the search terms used to help create these two dependent variables is included in Appendix II.

Below, are two parliamentary questions which were considered to be illustrative of MPs substantively representing the interests of I.O. individuals in regard to employment:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will bring forward proposals to increase the 40 pence per mile travel allowance for self-employed taxpayers.

- Harriet Baldwin (Con, West Worcestershire) 23/01/2011.

To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills how many and what proportion of (a) people, (b) men and (c) women were in (i) work, (ii) full-time work and (iii) part-time work in each constituency earn the national minimum wage; and what those figures were in each year since 2010.

- Gloria de Piero (Lab, Ashfield) 01/04/2014.

Table 8.5 contains descriptive statistics that detail the number of questions submitted by MPs that addressed Unemployment and Employment based on whether the MPs who asked these questions were of an immigrant or a native British background and whether they were white or belonged to an ethnic minority. It demonstrates that 1,047 questions were tabled that were deemed to pertain sufficiently to Unemployment. Additionally, it shows that a total of 287 questions were put to ministers concerning Employment. In regard to the associations between these dependent and independent variables, Table 8.5 presents a mixed set of results. In regard to Unemployment, the chi-square test indicates that the relationship between the I.O. MP and BAME MP independent dummy variables are not statistically

207 significant at the five per cent level, although the relationship between Unemployment and the latter independent variable is statistically significant at the ten per cent level. Turning to Employment, the chi-square tests found in the table observe that the association between this latter dependent variable and the I.O. dummy variable is not statistically significant. However, the association between the Employment and the BAME/non-BAME dummy variable is statistically significant. In this second instance, therefore, the null hypothesis can be rejected.

208

Table 8. 5. Unemployment & Employment-related questions – total numbers and column percentages Other Question Question explicitly Total related to Unemployment

Native MP 157,325 (82.58%) 867 (82.81%) 158,192 (82.58%)

I.O. MP 33,181 (17.42%) 180 (17.19%) 33,361 (17.42%)

Total 190,506 (100.00%) 1,047 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00%) Pearson chi ² = 0.04 p = 0.85 Other Question Question explicitly Total related to Employment

Native MP 157,946 (82.58%) 246 (85.71%) 158,192 (82.58%)

I.O. MP 33,320 (17.42%) 41 (14.29%) 33,361 (17.42%)

Total 191,266 (100.00%) 287 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00%) Pearson chi ² = 1.96 p = 0.16 Other Question Question explicitly Total related to Unemployment

White MP 176,093 (92.43%) 983 (93.89%) 177,076 (92.44%)

BAME MP 14,413 (7.57%) 64 (6.11%) 14,477 (7.56%)

Total 190,506 (100.00%) 1,047 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00%) Pearson chi ² = 3.15 p = 0.08 Other Question Question explicitly Total related to Employment

White MP 176,800 (92.44%) 276 (96.17%) 177,076 (92.44%)

BAME MP 14,466 (7.56%) 11 (3.83%) 14,477 (7.56%)

Total 191,266 (100.00%) 287 (100.00%) 191,553 (100.00%) Pearson chi ² = 5.71 p = 0.02 Source: Author’s own.

209

Independent & Control Variables

As in previous chapters, a number of the independent and control variables which have been used in earlier chapters have once again been utilised in this chapter. In addition, however, five other independent variables unique to this chapter were applied. These are discussed in this section and are listed below in Table 8.6 along with a collection of relevant descriptive statistics.

Firstly, it was important to include independent variables which grouped MPs according to where their party was situated on the political spectrum on issues to do with the labour market. This is because matters relating to self-employment may be of particular interest to MPs of the right, such as those belonging to the Conservative Party. This is because parties on the political right have championed individualism and entrepreneurship and have viewed small-scale and or family-owned businesses as being essential to the country’s long-term economic success (Scase & Goffee, 2015). Indeed, when reading questions found using the search term ‘self-employ*’, one notes, for example, a series of questions from Tory Members on exempting the self-employed from complying with certain health and safety regulations during the 2010-15 Parliament. At the same time, the political left has traditionally placed a greater emphasis on welfare provision (Bara, 2006; Bara & Budge, 2001). 53 54 Questions from Members belonging to parties of the left refer to the unemployed, self-employed and those in part-time employment in terms of benefits, including housing and out-of-work benefits. Two dummy variables are, therefore, used to explore the possible effect political ideology may have on the aforementioned dependent variables. The first of these is used in the previous chapter and codes MPs from right-of-centre parties as ‘1’ and MPs of other political parties as ‘0’. The second of these variables, meanwhile, is a variable that is unique to this chapter and codes MPs representing a left of centre party as ‘1’ and MPs belonging to other parties as ‘0’. 55

Next, Relevant Experience/Knowledge registers whether or not MPs could be considered to have experience or knowledge of or interest in matters pertaining to the labour market. This includes MPs who were previously employed as small business owners, entrepreneurs or as social workers. As in previous chapters, MPs who sat as members of relevant committees; in

53 Parties coded as left-of-centre are as follows: Blaenau Gwent People’s Voice, Green, Labour, Plaid Cymru, Respect, SDLP, Sinn Féin and Scottish National Party (SNP). 54 As noted in an earlier footnote, parties coded as right-of-centre are as follows: Conservative, DUP as well as Northern Ireland Independent MP Sylvia Hermon, formerly of the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP). UKIP MPs Douglas Carswell and Mark Reckless, who were elected to Parliament as Conservatives in 2010 and later defected to UKIP in late 2014, have also been coded in this manner. 55 MPs of Westminster parties broadly categorised as being of the political ‘centre’ are the Liberal Democrats (Clark, 2012) and the Alliance Party of Northern Ireland (Cochrane, 2014).

210 the case of this chapter, the Work and Pensions Select Committee, longer than on any other committee were similarly considered to have a degree of relevant experience or knowledge of this policy area, as were MPs who were part of labour market-related parliamentary groups, such as the APPGs on Youth Employment and Entrepreneurship.

The third of these new variables records the level of unemployment in each parliamentary constituency at the time of the 2011 Census. The next one of these variables is the Lower Educated variable which includes the percentage of individuals who had, at the time of the 2011 Census, received less than a Level 3 education. 56 The education variable has been included because higher levels of education are associated with lower levels of unemployment (Núñez & Livanos, 2010). This may, therefore, influence MPs to raise issues pertaining to the labour market in their parliamentary questions.

The final independent variable that is unique to this chapter gives the proportion of people between the ages of 16 and 74 who are either in part-time employment or who are self- employed. Finally, as is the case in earlier chapters, this chapter uses two control variables which are not employed elsewhere in the thesis. These note the number of questions that MPs submitted that did not relate to the two dependent variables respectively.

56 Examples of Level 3 qualifications in the United Kingdom include A-Level, AS-Level and an advanced apprenticeship. See https://www.gov.uk/what-different-qualification-levels-mean/list-of-qualification-levels (accessed 10 July 2019).

211

Table 8. 6. Independent & Control Variables (Descriptive Statistics) Variable N Mean Standard Minimum Maximum Deviation

Left-wing Party MP 669 0.44 0.50 0 1

Relevant 669 0.06 0.25 0 1 Experience/Knowledge (dummy)

Unemployment 669 4.42 1.43 1.8 9.5

Lower Educated 669 52.96 9.38 22.9 78.7

%Constituents who 669 23.22 3.36 13.7 32.8 work part-time or who are self-employed

Qs not relating to 669 284.94 399.75 0 3970 Unemployment

Qs not relating to 669 285.11 402.62 0 4037 Employment Source: Author’s own.

Results

The results from the first set regression models, which use Unemployment as the dependent variable, are displayed below in Table 8.7. As Unemployment is an overdispersed count variable, negative binomial regression has been used in each of the following models.

The first of these models (1a) is a baseline model which includes the immigrant-origin dummy variable in addition to three control variables. The model notes a very modest yet statistically insignificant relationship between recent immigrant family heritage and the likelihood of submitting questions relating to Unemployment among MPs. The second model (1b) expands on this by including, alongside the immigrant-origin dummy variable and the control variables, a couple of independent variables which observe the proportion of residents in each constituency who are unemployed and the proportion of lower educated constituents have been included to measure the effect that local factors may have had on MPs’ tendencies to submit questions on unemployment and the difficulties that certain individuals face when trying to enter the labour market. Starting with the Immigrant-origin MP dummy variable, this model produces a similar result to that which was observed in Model 1a. Namely, it observes a modest negative association between the dependent variable and the immigrant-origin independent variable that is not statistically significant. Meanwhile, the

212 result for the Unemployment variable indicates that MPs who represented constituencies with higher levels of unemployment showed a greater tendency to table questions pertaining to unemployment, thus offering partial support to the chapter’s third hypothesis (H3) outlined earlier. This is because the Lower Educated variable, in contrast, registers a neutral effect on the dependent variable. This result, however, is not statistically significant.

In the third and final model (1c), a more comprehensive range of independent variables have been incorporated. Turning to the result for the Immigrant-origin MP dummy variable, this model observes a negative relationship between immigrant background and questions pertaining to unemployment that is statistically significant. This result means that the first part of the initial hypothesis (H1) made earlier in the chapter, which predicted that immigrant- origin MPs would have been more likely to have put forward questions relating to unemployment than native MPs, can be rejected. On the other hand, Members belonging to a minority ethnic group demonstrated a greater tendency to submit questions addressing unemployment than white Members. This finding supports the initial part of the second hypothesis (H2). Additionally, the model demonstrates that belonging to a party of the centre-left moderately increases the likelihood of tabling questions addressing unemployment (IRR = 1.39 p =<0.05). A similar positive association is noted between the Relevant Experience variable and the dependent variable.

Conversely, Model 1c finds only partial evidence to support the earlier prediction (see H3) that local factors such as unemployment and education levels within constituencies would have had an influence on Members’ likelihoods of tabling questions addressing joblessness. While higher levels of unemployment were found to have had a moderately positive effect on the dependent variable, the Lower Educated variable, on the other hand, registered a neutral effect that is statistically insignificant.

213

Table 8. 7. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to Unemployment Dependent Variable Unemployment Unemployment Unemployment Model 1a Model 1b Model 1c Independent Variables

Immigrant-origin MP 0.90 (0.19) 0.78 (0.15) 0.55 (0.13) ** (dummy)

BAME MP (dummy) 2.36 (0.79) **

Left-wing Party MP 1.39 (0.21) ** (dummy)

Relevant 1.42 (0.26) * Experience/Knowledge (dummy)

Constituency 0.99 (0.01) Cosmopolitanism

Constituency 1.23 (0.06) *** 1.19 (0.08) *** unemployment

Lower Educated 1.00 (0.01) 1.00 (0.01)

Marginality 1.00 (0.00)

Qs not relating to 1.00 (0.00) *** 1.00 (0.00) *** 1.00 (0.00) *** Unemployment

Ministerial Service 0.97 (0.01) *** 0.97 (0.01) *** 0.98 (0.01) *** (months)

Service as MP during 1.01 (0.01) * 1.02 (0.01) ** 1.02 (0.01) ** 2010-15 Parliament (months) Constant 0.33 (0.15) * 0.08 (0.04) *** 0.09 (0.07) *** McFadden’s r² 0.12 0.14 0.14 N 669 669 669 *p<0.1 **p<0.05 ***p<0.01 Incidence Rate Ratios (robust standard errors clustered around Name of MP in brackets).

The second set of regression models are included in Table 8.8 and use Employment as the dependent variable. Employment is likewise an overdispersed count variable, which has necessitated the use of negative binomial regression in each of these models. The first of these models (2a) again takes the form of a baseline model in which the Immigrant-origin

214

MP dummy variable is examined alongside the three control variables. The model indicates that immigrant-origin MPs were slightly less likely to submit questions on self-employment or part-time and more insecure work than native MPs; however, this result is statistically insignificant.

Model 2b considers the extent of the effect that local factors such as the proportion of lower educated individuals and those who are self-employed or who are in part-time work had on the dependent variable when included in a model alongside the I.O. MP dummy variable. The Lower Educated variable has been included because individuals with fewer educational qualifications and skills may be more restricted in the types of work which they can obtain. This model observes a similar result to that found in Model 2a in regard to the binary Immigrant-origin MP variable; it observes a modest negative relationship which is not significant. Turning to the variables that have been included to explore the effect of local factors on MPs behaviour, we note that the likelihood that Members would table more questions addressing Employment slightly decreases for MPs in constituencies where higher proportions of adults who are in self-employment or who work part-time (IRR = 0.91 p =<0.1). This finding consequently invalidates the latter part of the third hypothesis (H3) which predicted that having a higher portion of constituents in part-time work or self-employment would prompt MPs to table more questions relating to these types of employment.

The third and final model (2c), meanwhile, utilises a more varied set of independent variables by including measures of MP characteristics, experience, partisanship and a series of local factor variables in addition to the Constituency Cosmopolitanism variable. Firstly, this model observes that there was a slightly negative, albeit statistically insignificant, association between immigrant-origin status and the dependent variable. In addition, while previously it was observed that ethnic minority MPs were almost twice as likely to put forward questions relating to Unemployment, Model 2c suggests that BAME Members were, conversely, less likely to submit questions addressing the interests of employed immigrant-origin individuals than white MPs, although this result was not found to be statistically significant. Meanwhile, the Constituency Cosmopolitanism variable registers a neutral relationship with the dependent variable that is not statistically significant. Next, the ‘partisanship’ variables indicate that membership of parties of the left and right had positive effects on MPs’ likelihood of tabling questions relating to Employment; in particular, MPs from parties of the left. However, these results were not found to be statistically significant.

Finally, Model 2c finds that the dependent variable registers neutral yet statistically insignificant associations with both the education and self-employment/part-time work variables. As a result of this finding, H3 can be neither affirmed nor rejected.

215

Table 8. 8. Negative binomial regression for the number of questions relating to Employment Dependent Variable Employment Employment Employment Model 2a Model 2b Model 2c Independent Variables

Immigrant-origin MP 0.84 (0.29) 0.82 (0.25) 0.90 (0.30) (dummy)

BAME MP (dummy) 0.58 (0.30)

Left-wing Party MP 2.42 (1.39) (dummy)

Right-wing Party MP 1.16 (0.73) (dummy)

Relevant 1.52 (0.52) Experience/Knowledge (dummy)

Constituency 1.00 (0.01) Cosmopolitanism

% Constituents who 0.91 (0.03) *** 0.95 (0.04) work part-time or are self-employed

Lower Educated 1.02 (0.01) * 1.01 (0.01)

Marginality 0.99 (0.01)

Qs not relating to 1.00 (0.00) *** 1.00 (0.00) *** 1.00 (0.00) *** Employment

Ministerial Service 0.97 (0.01) *** 0.98 (0.01) * 0.99 (0.01) (months)

Service as MP during 1.04 (0.03) 1.05 (0.03) 1.05 (0.03) * 2010-15 Parliament (months) Constant 0.02 (0.03) ** 0.04 (0.07) * 0.01 (0.02) ** McFadden’s r² 0.12 0.13 0.14 N 669 669 669 *p<0.1 **p<0.05 ***p<0.01 Incidence Rate Ratios (robust standard errors clustered around Name of MP in brackets).

216

Discussion

As mentioned earlier in this chapter and in the dissertation, this chapter has sought to investigate whether MPs from an immigrant background were more likely to have substantively represented the labour market interests of immigrant-origin individuals during the 2010-15 Parliament. Beginning with the findings from the corpus linguistics presented earlier, apart from using terms such as ‘fixed-term’ and ‘zero-hours’ in relation to employment and employee(s), native and immigrant-origin MPs both used similar language when raising matters relating to the ‘out of work’ and ‘in work’ interests of immigrant-origin individuals in their questions.

Next, regarding how likely MPs were to have submitted questions pertaining to the labour market interests of I.O. individuals, the above results show that immigrant-origin MPs did not, as a whole, exhibit a greater tendency to table questions relating to unemployment. However, ethnic minority MPs were more likely to submit questions pertaining to unemployment than white MPs. This could be interpreted as evidence that a sense of group consciousness is present among BAME MPs which encourages them to highlight unemployment and to promote ways to ensure that more people have access to the labour market because they are conscious and aware of the fact that minority ethnic communities have traditionally suffered from lower levels of employment.

This particular result once again highlights the importance of race and ethnicity in the likelihood that individuals of immigrant-origin in the UK will have their interests substantively represented by Members of Parliament. As some of the previous chapters have demonstrated, having a recent immigrant family background does not, in and of itself increase the tendency that individual MPs will substantively represent individuals of immigrant-origin. Rather, non-white ethnicity is a stronger determinant of whether or not an MP will substantively represent the interests of immigrant-origin individuals in matters relating to unemployment.

What is noteworthy, however, is that BAME MPs did not possess the same willingness to substantively represent the ‘in work’ interests of I.O. individuals through their parliamentary questions. A possible explanation for this is that the reduction in unemployment represents a higher priority for BAME MPs as joblessness has long been an issue that has affected BAME communities. On the other hand, representing the interests of those who are currently economically active might be considered to be more of a ‘secondary’ or a ‘lesser’ priority for these Members.

217

While race and ethnicity were found to have had some bearing on MPs’ likelihood of submitting questions that pertained to the labour market interests of individuals of immigrant- origin, local factors, by contrast, appeared to have had little effect on whether or not Members would submit more questions relating to I.O. individuals’ labour market interests. By once again finding that local factors did not play a significant role in the likelihood of MPs to table questions addressing the labour market, we can observe a pattern that appears to be or is becoming rather consistent. What these particular results indicate and perhaps reinforce is that MPs are not influenced by the demography of their constituencies. This may be because many MPs are, to use the categories adopted by Searing (1985), ‘policy advocates’ as opposed to ‘constituency members’. In other words, the majority of MPs who served during the 2010-15 Parliament were first and foremost more motivated to influence policy and legislation rather than to immerse themselves in matters relating to their constituencies and constituents.

Similarly, there is only modest evidence that partisanship had any effect on whether or not MPs were more likely to have substantively represented the labour market interests of individuals with an immigrant background. The fact that Members from a left-of-centre party were moderately more likely (significant at five per cent) to have tabled questions relating to unemployment than right-of-centre parliamentarians is perhaps attributable to the philosophy of parties and individuals on the political left, whose ideologies have been more orientated towards taking a more interventionist approach to tackling joblessness. Moreover, the largest left-of-centre bloc in the House of Commons at the time was the Labour Party, which formed the Official Opposition during the 2010-15 Parliament. As an opposition party, Labour parliamentarians would have had an additional incentive to scrutinise and monitor the then Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition government’s record on unemployment.

Conclusion

This chapter has concluded this dissertation’s wider investigation into the link between descriptive and substantive representation in relation to immigrant-origin individuals in the United Kingdom by investigating whether MPs from an immigrant family background were more inclined to represent the labour market interests of individuals from an immigrant background.

As the chapter has documented, rates of unemployment have been, on average, higher among British immigrant-origin communities (Blackaby et al., 1997; Blackaby et al., 1999; Catney & Sabater, 2015; Nazroo & Kapadia, 2013a). This differential in employment

218 between the ‘host’, i.e. native British society and relative newcomers has been observed in data spanning several decades (Blackaby et al., 1997; Blackaby et al., 1999). Secondly, individuals from an immigrant background who are in work are more likely to be in part-time and non-permanent work than indigenous Britons. Thirdly, official statistics have also observed higher levels of self-employment in certain immigrant communities (Nazroo & Kapadia, 2013b). As a result of these disparities, it is possible, as the Determining Interests chapter covers in greater depth, to identify the labour market interests of the immigrant-origin population. In this thesis, MPs who raised these issues in their parliamentary questions were deemed to be providing substantive representation to immigrant-origin members of the public.

Starting with the chapter’s first line of enquiry, which has sought to measure immigrant-origin MPs’ likelihood of raising matters pertaining to unemployment, this chapter has documented that British parliamentarians, regardless of their immigrant-origin status or their ethnicity, used similar language when making reference to unemployment during the 2010-15 Parliament in their parliamentary questions and were less likely to submit parliamentary questions for written answer addressing unemployment than native British MPs. However, it also notes that MPs belonging to an ethnic minority, who almost universally qualified as immigrant-origin under the definition employed in this dissertation, demonstrated a greater inclination to put forward questions relating to unemployment than their white colleagues. This, in turn, demonstrates that a section of immigrant-origin MPs has represented these interests to a greater extent than MPs who do not originate from an immigrant background. Once again, as in other chapters, this provides further evidence that issues of interest to the immigrant-origin population are represented by this section of immigrant-origin MPs, namely, BAME MPs.

The second line of enquiry adopted in this chapter investigated how likely immigrant-origin MPs were to have substantively represented the ‘in work’ interests of I.O. individuals. Overall, the findings presented and discussed in relation to this second line of enquiry once again challenge the theoretical assumption that legislators who descriptively represent underrepresented and or minority groups will demonstrate a greater tendency to substantively represent the interests of those whom they descriptively represent. Firstly, as noted earlier, the types of words and language used by MPs when referring to employment and employees in their questions did not significantly differ from one another. Additionally, the results from this second line of enquiry did not reveal evidence that having an immigrant background, including both I.O. white and BAME, exhibited a positive relationship with the tabling of parliamentary questions addressing the ‘in work’ interests of I.O. individuals.

219

In summary, this chapter’s findings mirror several of those observed in previous chapters. Firstly, it finds that immigrant-origin MPs were no more likely to have substantively represented the interests of individuals of immigrant-origin than native British parliamentarians. BAME MPs, however, showed a greater tendency to substantively represent I.O. individuals’ ‘out of work’ interests. As BAME MPs who served during the 2010- 15 Parliament were almost entirely immigrant-origin by the definition employed in this dissertation, we can conclude that a subsection of immigrant-origin MPs was, at least, more likely to have substantively represented the labour market interests of the immigrant-origin population than native British parliamentarians. Moreover, what these results and results presented in previous chapters indicate is that race and ethnicity may be a more reliable indicator than having immigrant heritage that an MP will substantively represent issues and causes that are in the interests of I.O. individuals more broadly.

This particular finding has a potentially important implication for substantive representation should the House of Commons continue on its current trajectory and become more ethnically and racially diverse following future general elections. As discussed earlier in the thesis, it is often assumed that by electing a legislature that is more broadly representative of the people it represents will enhance the substantive representation of minority and or groups that are underrepresented among political office. Indeed, this is a primary reason behind supporting a more diverse, descriptively representative legislature. However, according to the findings presented in this chapter, the election of more MPs from ethnic minority backgrounds will increase the likelihood that the interests of I.O. individuals in relation to the unemployment are substantively represented. That being said, however, the data presented here indicate this will not necessarily result in the substantive representation of the interests of immigrant- origin individuals who are in work.

220

Chapter 9. Conclusion

Introduction

Discourse both inside and outside of academic research has often, both implicitly and explicitly, assumed that politically underrepresented and disadvantaged groups will have their interests best represented by elected representatives with whom they share certain traits and characteristics (Dovi, 2002; Mansbridge, 1999, 2003 & 2011; Rehfeld, 2011). Various research examining the apparent link between descriptive and substantive representation has observed that British ethnic (Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013; Saalfeld & Kyriakopoulou, 2011) and religious minorities, specifically Muslims and Jews (Kolpinskaya, 2017), have been more likely to have been substantively represented by MPs from minority ethnic backgrounds and adherents of the Muslim and Jewish faiths respectively.

However, what has not previously been explored in extant academic research is whether or not and the extent to which MPs who come from a recent immigrant family background have been more likely than their native British parliamentary counterparts to substantively represent the interests of members of the public who likewise come from an immigrant background. To date, academic investigation into the link between the descriptive and substantive representation of minority groups in the United Kingdom has, as mentioned in the previous paragraph and earlier in the dissertation, focused on ethnic and or visible minorities. This dissertation has, meanwhile, sought to expand on this research by exploring this relationship in relation to the immigrant-origin population, a broader segment of the UK society that includes individuals from both white and BAME immigrant backgrounds.

Hence, while the main line of enquiry of this thesis has therefore been to examine whether or not MPs from an immigrant background were more likely to have substantively represented the interests of the immigrant-origin population, this study has also pursued two further lines of enquiry. Firstly, it has explored whether ethnic minority MPs were more likely to have substantively represented the interests of I.O. individuals compared to white MPs. By pursuing this secondary line of enquiry we can gain a greater understanding of whether race and ethnicity are more important than immigrant heritage in determining the likelihood of MPs substantively representing the interests of immigrant-origin individuals. Meanwhile, the third question that this thesis has explored is whether or not or the extent to which local

221 factors play a part in influencing individual MPs’ tendency to substantively represent the interests of immigrant-origin individuals.

As outlined earlier in the dissertation, there are a number of different reasons why the substantive representation of immigrant-origin individuals is important and warrants closer study. Firstly, the relationship between the descriptive and substantive representation of minority and or underrepresented groups in the British Parliament remains relatively unexplored in extant literature. When such studies have been conducted, they have, however, tended to focus on BAME legislators (Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Kyriakopoulou, 2011), ‘visible minorities’ (Geese, Goldbach & Saalfeld, 2016; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013) or religious minorities, specifically Muslims and Jews (Kolpinskaya, 2017). Research into the association between descriptive and substantive representation in relation to individuals of immigrant-origin therefore not only expands academic knowledge and understanding of substantive representation; in addition, it also fills a gap in the literature by focusing on a broader range of society than has featured in existing research.

Secondly, research into the substantive representation of individuals from an immigrant background is important because of the demographic changes that have taken place in the United Kingdom in recent years. Like many other Western societies, the UK has become a more multicultural society in recent decades and demographic projections estimate that this is a trend that will continue in the coming years (Coleman, 2013). Today, the country is home to millions of individuals from a diverse range of immigrant backgrounds. This includes various ethnic minority communities who have familial roots in the Caribbean, Africa and the Indian subcontinent (Spencer, 1997) in addition to a large white immigrant-origin population with family ties to countries such as Ireland and regions such as continental Europe, North America and Australasia (Vargas-Silva & Markaki, 2017). Using data from the 2011 Census, this thesis has estimated that the proportion of individuals residing in the UK who are either themselves immigrants or who are one generation removed from immigration to the country accounted for 19.5 per cent, or one in five people resident in the UK when this Census was conducted. Hence, given the size and presence of the immigrant-origin population in contemporary Britain, it is, therefore, reasonable to want to further develop academic understanding of those who come from an immigrant background so we can identify and better understand the interests, both of immigrant communities in general but also specific immigrant communities, such as the British Irish or British Pakistani communities. This, in turn, allows us to examine the extent to which British politicians have been responsive to the interests of individuals of immigrant-origin.

A third reason why this research is worthwhile is linked to the longstanding view that a political legislature ought to be a reflection or a ‘microcosm’ of the society that it has been

222 elected to represent. According to this perspective, different groups and sections of society ought to be descriptively represented in numbers that proportionally reflect their shares of the wider population in order to ensure that the promotion and avocation of group interests which may otherwise be ignored are adequately represented and articulated (Pitkin, 1967). Furthermore, the adequate representation of various groups in a legislature is considered paramount as it ensures that the legislature stands a better chance of being legitimately viewed as ‘representative’ of the society that it has been elected to represent (Mansbridge, 1999; Williams, 1998). According to other data presented in the Introduction chapter, individuals from an immigrant background were descriptively underrepresented in the British Parliament during the 2010-15 Parliament; in particular, individuals belonging to an ethnic minority. Due to the ‘deficit’ in descriptive representation of I.O. individuals during the 2010- 15 Parliament, it is, therefore, possible that issues and policies that are in the interests of I.O. individuals may not have been represented to the extent to which these causes may have otherwise been represented if the membership of this Parliament had more closely reflected the diversity of wider British society.

Traditionally, many immigrant communities have been descriptively underrepresented among holders of political office and the legislative process in general. Consequently, many such communities have had a diminished voice in British electoral politics. While there has been a long history of Jewish representation in the British Parliament (Kadish, 1992; Rich, 2016) other immigrant communities, most notably ethnic minority communities, have traditionally lacked a significant voice in British politics owing to a lack of descriptive representation in the House of Commons, although the number of ethnic minority Members has increased in recent general elections (Heath et al., 2013; Katwala, 2017).

Furthermore, as has been discussed previously, many immigrant communities have traditionally experienced, and continue to experience, discrimination and disadvantage in Britain. This has often been discussed in relation to ethnic minorities (see, e.g., Carlsson & Eriksson, 2015; Heath & Cheung, 2007; Khattab & Fox, 2016; Newburn, Shiner & Hayman, 2004; Parmar, 2014; Phillips & Bowling, 2017) however, other research has documented both historical and contemporary discrimination against immigrant-origin white communities, including the Irish (Hickman, 1998; MacRaild, 1999), Jews (Julius, 2010; Kushner, 2009) and immigrants from the aforementioned A8 countries of Central and Eastern Europe (Currie, 2007; Fox, Morosanu & Szilassy, 2015, 2012). Against this historical backdrop of discrimination and disadvantage, the need for immigrant-origin individuals to be sufficiently represented within the British Parliament is thus paramount in order to try and rectify past discrimination and disadvantage.

223

Finally, the substantive representation of immigrant-origin individuals is worthy of closer study not only because of changes that have occurred in the wider British society but because of changes that have taken place in the House of Commons in terms of the composition of its members. Just as British society has become more diverse over the years, the House of Commons has also become more diverse which has better facilitated the study of substantive representation of minority groups and its relationship with descriptive representation. Although, as the data presented in the Introduction chapter has demonstrated, the 2010-15 Parliament did not mirror the wider immigrant-origin population, this Parliament, did, however, represent a significant turning point for minority representation as the 2010 general election witnessed the entry of a larger proportion of BAME MPs. Following the two subsequent general elections that took place in 2015 and 2017, the proportion of BAME MPs has increased further (Katwala, 2017). Consequently, in the years following the 2010 general election, there have been further opportunities, owing to the increase in the number of MPs from an immigrant background, to examine whether MPs from an immigrant background have been more likely to substantively represent the interests of immigrant-origin members of the British public. Moreover, political parties have engaged in and continue to engage in efforts to improve the levels of diversity among their Members of Parliament by utilising, for example, all-BAME shortlists 57 and by selecting BAME candidates in ‘safe’ parliamentary seats where the risk of losing the seat to a rival party is very low (Sobolewska, 2013). If the House of Commons continues on its current trend by becoming a more diverse legislature in years to come, researchers will have more opportunities to investigate the nature of the relationship between the descriptive and substantive representation of minority and or underrepresented groups such as the I.O. population of the UK.

To measure substantive representation, this study has investigated the likelihood that MPs tabled parliamentary questions for written answer that pertained to at least one of four different policy areas. This type of parliamentary question is a device used by MPs to monitor and scrutinise government decisions and activity and to extract information from government (Hansard, 2010; Russo & Wiberg, 2010). To accomplish this, a series of search term ‘dictionaries’ were then used to locate questions that contained these words and phrases. If the questions returned in these searches were deemed to show evidence of substantive representation in relation to at least one of the four different policy areas then they were coded accordingly.

57 Labour used an all-female, all-BAME shortlist in the Lewisham East by-election held in June 2018. See Cowburn (2018).

224

Next, the number of questions that each MP submitted demonstrating substantive representation was entered into a dataset and a series of negative binomial regression models were then run to examine the effect that recent migratory heritage had on how likely MPs were to submit questions that demonstrated substantive representation in regard to these four policy areas. In addition, and as a form of secondary analysis, this study has used a device from the field of corpus linguistics known as collocation to explore the content of the questions. This was done with the intention of gaining a better understanding of the types of words and language MPs used in relation to the different policy areas that have been investigated here. In particular, words that referred either to immigrant-origin communities and or different ethnic groups directly (i.e. ‘immigrant’) or are of significance to I.O. communities (i.e. ‘hate’) were taken as evidence of substantive representation. Words that indicated a direct, as opposed to a more passive approach from MPs, such as ‘tackle’ and ‘strategy’ were likewise considered to demonstrate evidence of substantive representation.

To summarise its main findings, this thesis has found, as the following section of this chapter discusses in greater detail, that immigrant-origin MPs were no more likely to have had substantively represented the interests of immigrant-origin individuals than native British parliamentarians. However, MPs belonging to an ethnic minority were more inclined to have represented certain policies and issues that are in the interests of the immigrant-origin population compared to white MPs.

The remainder of this Conclusion chapter is structured as follows. It continues by discussing the main findings from this study and its contribution to the wider body of literature on substantive representation. It then evaluates the project and outlines its implications before ending with suggesting possible opportunities for further research.

Main Findings

The first and most significant finding that this thesis has documented is that, in relation to four different policy areas (health, prejudice and discrimination, crime and the criminal justice system and the labour market), immigrant-origin MPs who served during the 2010-15 Parliament were no more likely to have substantively represented the interests of the immigrant-origin population than native British MPs.

In none of the previous four chapters was evidence found demonstrating that I.O. MPs were more likely to have substantively represented the interests of immigrant-origin individuals than native MPs. Rather, this dissertation has found that, in relation to cardiovascular disease and unemployment, immigrant-origin MPs were less likely to have substantively

225 represented the interests of immigrant-origin individuals during the 2010-15 Parliament. The results presented and discussed in the earlier chapters have shown that on the policies and issues that have been analysed in this thesis, British MPs from a native background can be relied upon to represent these matters to the same extent as their immigrant-origin parliamentary colleagues. In fact, in some cases, native MPs may be better relied upon to substantively represent these issues and policies compared to immigrant-origin MPs.

While finding that an immigrant background does not necessarily translate into substantive outcomes, this dissertation has, however, demonstrated that, in some cases, black, Asian and minority ethnic MPs serving during the 2010-15 Parliament, who almost universally qualified as ‘immigrant-origin’ under the definition employed in this dissertation, showed a greater tendency to table questions on matters of interest to immigrant-origin individuals than white MPs, including both native British and immigrant-origin. On matters relating to crime, unemployment and cardiovascular disease, it was found that BAME Members showed a greater likelihood to represent the interests of immigrant-origin individuals. In the case of the latter, BAME Members were considerably more likely to table questions relating to cardiovascular disease than white colleagues. Interestingly, results from Chapter 6 also found that BAME MPs took a noticeably greater interest in highlighting types of prejudice and discrimination affecting other sections of society, such as sexism and homophobia. This suggests that when the proportion of descriptive representatives of these groups is low or even non-existent, group interests may still be articulated and represented by other legislators belonging to other underrepresented groups. This particular finding, as discussed later in this Conclusion chapter, represents a new contribution to research and provides an avenue for future research.

Hence, these findings suggest that coming from a recent immigrant background in and of itself appears to be less important, whereas belonging to an ethnic minority was more influential in determining MPs’ behaviour in relation to immigrant-origin interests. This, in turn, indicates that non-white ethnicity is a more reliable indicator that an MP will ‘do more’ to substantively represent the interests of the immigrant-origin population. This may be due to the fact that a form of group consciousness arising from visible difference and social disadvantage is present among BAME parliamentary candidates and MPs which engenders a sense of a responsibility to represent members of the public who likewise belong to an ethnic minority (Sobolewska, McKee & Campbell, 2018). This may, in turn, prompt and motivate these MPs to articulate, champion and represent issues and causes that are in the interests of immigrant-origin individuals and to promote a greater awareness of how these issues affect others from a minority ethnic background.

226

Turning to the findings in regard to local factors, research investigating the link between descriptive and substantive representation of ethnic minorities in the British Parliament concludes that MPs are likely to be influenced by factors relevant to their individual constituencies such as the demographics of their constituency; namely, the levels of ethnic diversity within their constituencies (Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013). Contrary to this research, however, this dissertation finds that, in almost all cases, local factors had no effect on how likely MPs were to submit more questions in the interests of immigrant-origin individuals. This may suggest that many of the MPs who served in the 2010-15 Parliament, like many of their counterparts from the early 1970s (Searing, 1985) could likewise be categorised as ‘policy advocates’ who are first and foremost interested in and motivated by shaping and influencing policy as opposed to so-called ‘constituency members’ who are acting to represent the interests and preferences of their constituents (Ibid.).

Moreover, these findings may also indicate that MPs, recognising the relative freedom and flexibility that parliamentary questions for written answer afford, are therefore more inclined to use these questions as a means to further and champion issues and causes of interest to them. Simultaneously, MPs may use other types of questions, other opportunities and devices available to them as MPs to represent and advocate on behalf of constituency matters and government legislation and proposals.

Another reason why local factors may not have been found to have had an effect on the tendencies of MPs to submit questions regarding the interests of immigrant-origin individuals is because Members who represented more multicultural constituencies and who have sought to represent their minority constituents may have taken it upon themselves to substantively represent the interests of their minority constituents in relation to issues and causes more generally associated with immigrant communities. Empirically, this has been demonstrated MPs representing more multicultural constituencies have been more likely to have substantively represented issues traditionally associated with minority groups (Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013). Consequently, issues and causes that do not pertain predominantly or near- exclusively to I.O. individuals, which this thesis has mainly used to assess substantive representation, have not been represented in Westminster to the same extent as the aforementioned ‘minority’ or ‘immigrant’ issues and areas of policy by MPs in diverse seats as they are less likely to be considered to be issues and policy areas of interest to individuals from an immigrant background.

In addition to these findings, this thesis has also observed that the size of the electoral majority secured by an MP in their previous election had virtually no bearing on whether or not they tabled more questions relating to immigrant-origin interests. As discussed in the subsequent section of this chapter, this particular finding indicates that MPs’ likelihood of

227 substantively representing issues and causes that are in the interests of I.O. individuals is not influenced or ‘guided’ by how vulnerable they are to electoral defeat in a subsequent election. Lastly, this study has found that, across many of the policy areas it investigates, past or present relevant experience and or knowledge of a specific policy area is a significant factor in determining whether or not MPs submit more questions that represent, in a substantive sense, the interests of I.O. individuals. If explored more broadly, we could well find that MPs are more inclined to prioritise policies and issues in which they have expertise when carrying out their parliamentary work.

Contribution to the Wider Body of Research on Substantive Representation

This study has made several important contributions to the wider body of literature on the substantive representation of minority groups. This part of the Conclusion chapter will address each of these contributions in turn.

Its first contribution to this literature has been that it has focused on a larger and more diverse minority population than has hitherto featured in the extant British literature. As mentioned at various intervals throughout in the thesis, research on the substantive representation of minority groups in the United Kingdom has focused on ethnic or visible (Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013; Saalfeld & Kyriakopoulou, 2011) and religious minorities (Kolpinskaya, 2017). By contrast, this thesis has studied substantive representation in relation to the immigrant-origin population of the UK. This consists of citizens and residents of the United Kingdom who are either immigrants themselves or have or had at least one parent who was a citizen of another country. This includes not only those belonging to British BAME communities but also individuals from a white immigrant background. The reasons for studying substantive representation in relation to individuals of immigrant-origin are twofold; first, the immigrant-origin population of the UK, as documented throughout this thesis, is very diverse and consists of individuals from a variety of different backgrounds.

Second, by focusing on both white immigrant-origin and BAME communities, it is possible to investigate the extent to which immigrant heritage leads to substantive representation or whether non-white ethnicity plays a more significant role in influencing the likelihood of MPs to substantively represent the interests of immigrant-origin members of the British public. White people from an immigrant background who do not belong to the ‘first generation’ of migrants have traditionally been overlooked in empirical British and American literature

228 unless they mobilise, advance claims of identity and are in some way visibly distinct from the majority (i.e. white) populations of these countries (Sobolewska, 2017). Moreover, as the discussion on the ‘ethnic agenda’ (Dancygier & Saunders, 2006; Fitzgerald, 1987; Heath et al., 2013; Saggar, 2000; Sobolewska, 2005; Studlar, 1986) in Chapter 4 has demonstrated, academic literature on immigrant-origin white communities is scarce. As a result, it is unclear whether or not these individuals have an agenda that is in some way distinct from the native population. If there is evidence that an ‘agenda’ exists among immigrant-origin whites then it is necessary to explore this in greater detail so that assessments can be made about the substantive representation of white individuals who come from an immigrant background.

The findings from this thesis demonstrate that race and ethnicity are still important when it comes to the substantive representation of minority groups. In the earlier policy area chapters, it has been documented that race and ethnicity have been a more significant predictor of substantive representation than immigrant background among British Members of Parliament. This represents a significant contribution to the literature on substantive representation as it provides further evidence that demonstrates race is an important and a ‘socially meaningful concept’ (Lentin, 2016: 385). This, in turn, has direct implications for continental European literature where both the concept of and reference to race has often been neglected and where the use of the term ‘immigrant’ tends to be employed instead (Sobolewska, 2017).

In addition, this dissertation has made a further contribution to the substantive representation literature by employing a different set of issues by which to quantify this form of representation. While the extant literature cited previously has concentrated on what might be considered ‘minority’ and or ‘immigrant’-specific issues such as immigration to the UK, prejudice and ethnic diversity, this doctoral study has, on the other hand, expanded on this research by focusing on policy areas that do not pertain largely or exclusively to individuals from an immigrant background. However, these policy areas can nonetheless be considered as ‘immigrant-origin’ issues because of documented disparities that exist between individuals of immigrant-origin and the native British population. This represents a further contribution to the wider literature on substantive representation because the dissertation has documented that ethnic minority Members of Parliament were not only more likely to have substantively represented the interests of minority Britons in relation to ‘minority’ issues, but also in other policy areas, such as cardiovascular disease and mental ill-health, crime and unemployment which do not pertain largely or solely to I.O. individuals but are nevertheless important to immigrant communities for reasons discussed previously.

Next, this thesis has made a methodological contribution to the extant literature by exploring the content of parliamentary questions in addition to determining the rationale and motivation

229 behind the questions. Aforementioned studies investigating the substantive representation of minority groups in the British Parliament have adopted this latter approach, but have not examined the words and types of language that MPs have employed when tabling questions. This dissertation has conducted some preliminary analysis into the words that comprise parliamentary questions; specifically, by examining the words and types of language that appears in close proximity to certain words in order to gain an idea of the context(s) in which they appeared.

This study has also contributed to the wider body of research into the substantive representation of minority and or underrepresented groups in the UK Parliament by presenting data that calls into question the extent to which local and or constituency factors play a part in influencing British MPs to substantively represent the interests of these groups. As discussed in the preceding section of the chapter, research into descriptive and substantive representation has found that the ethnic diversity of parliamentary constituencies was the main factor in MPs’ likelihoods of tabling questions on matters that are in the interests of BAME members of the public (Saalfeld, 2011; Saalfeld & Bischof, 2013).

Similarly, through observing that the size of an MP’s electoral majority had neither a positive nor negative effect on parliamentarians’ tendencies to represent issues through parliamentary questions, this dissertation has made a further contribution to the literature studying descriptive and substantive representation. While it might be assumed, as this thesis did previously, that MPs defending smaller majorities would have shown a greater willingness to table questions as a means to signal to their constituents that they are performing their duties and so thus deserve to be re-elected to the Commons, these findings challenge the assumption that electoral majorities play in determining MPs’ behaviour and the extent to which the activities of individual MPs such as the types of questions they submit to members of the executive and the issues which they represent when making parliamentary speeches are guided by the general demographic profile of their constituents. Moving on, this thesis encourages us to consider what effect relevant experience and or knowledge have on MPs’ willingness to promote and discuss certain issues and policy areas in their work as MPs aside from factors such as party membership, constituency factors or traits or characteristics such as gender, race/ethnicity and socioeconomic background.

Finally, this thesis contributes to the literature on substantive representation by contributing to the literature on group consciousness in two ways. Firstly, it has presented results that lend support to the findings of this research by noting that, among MPs from an immigrant background, MPs who belonged to an ethnic minority exhibited signs of group consciousness. This supports other research which has observed evidence of group consciousness through surveys of British BAME parliamentary candidates (see, e.g., McKee,

230

2017; Sobolewska, McKee & Campbell, 2018) and in interviews with British BAME MPs (Jones et al., 2015; Nixon, 1998). Likewise, these findings support American literature demonstrating evidence of group consciousness among African-American legislators (Broockman, 2013; Fenno, 2003; Swain, 1993). While this dissertation has not used survey or interview questions put directly to parliamentary candidates and incumbent legislators as this aforementioned research 58 has done, its analysis of parliamentary questions suggests that a level of group consciousness or solidarity is present among MPs of minority ethnic origin judging by their greater tendency to table more questions relating to the interests of individuals from an immigrant background.

Second, by observing a statistically significant association between ethnicity and the submission of questions addressing types of prejudice that affect other societal groups who have been underrepresented in British politics, this thesis makes a further important contribution to the literature on group consciousness by presenting findings that suggest that a similar form of consciousness or solidarity towards other groups such as women, the LGBT community and individuals with disabilities exists among BAME MPs. This indicates that these MPs feel a responsibility to other sections of society who have similarly often lacked a presence in the legislative process and or remain descriptively underrepresented in political office.

As this investigation into cross-group consciousness constitutes only a minor part of this study, its findings can only be considered as preliminary. However, as mentioned in the later section of this chapter, this provides opportunities for future study as it remains an unexplored area of research. While the existence of group consciousness among ethnic minority MPs looks to be an established fact, there is certainly considerable scope for research into cross-group consciousness owing to the lack of scholarly interest in this area.

As this section of the chapter has outlined, this dissertation has made several significant contributions to the field of research into substantive representation. It has broadened the focus beyond ethnic minorities by focusing on individuals of immigrant-origin, which encompasses both ethnic minorities and white individuals who hail from an immigrant background. In addition, it has adopted a different set of policies and issues by which to measure substantive representation, with attention paid to issues and policy areas which are not generally considered to be minority or immigrant issues or policy areas but are of particular importance to I.O. individuals owing to disparities observed in empirical research. Thirdly, it has explored the content of parliamentary questions tabled by immigrant-origin

58 Broockman’s study is an exception here as it uses, as noted earlier in the dissertation, American state legislators’ levels of responsiveness to emails sent from a putative black alias as a proxy for group consciousness.

231

MPs in addition to determining the motivation and rationale behind questions tabled by MPs. Lastly, it has contributed to the literature on group consciousness by presenting findings that support the existence of group consciousness among BAME MPs towards other BAME citizens and also towards the members of other minority and or underrepresented groups.

However, perhaps the main contribution of this research has been that it has provided a first comprehensive investigation into the substantive representation of all people with recent immigrant heritage residing in the United Kingdom.

Evaluating the Project

As this study draws to a close, there are further opportunities to reflect on and evaluate its overall design. Firstly, using parliamentary questions for written answer to investigate the substantive representation of individuals of immigrant-origin has, as has been discussed earlier, a number of advantages. Most notably, the relative brevity of these questions allows the researcher to more easily ascertain the genesis of each question. Furthermore, this device provides a truer reflection of MPs’ interests, priorities and agendas as they grant MPs greater freedom to voice, without oversight or authorisation from senior party figures, their own priorities, agendas and preferences (Martin, 2011).

However that being said, it is important to note that parliamentary questions for written answer are but one outlet or device MPs can use to represent and to articulate the interests of their constituents and other members of society. Hence, efforts made by MPs to represent individuals of immigrant-origin through other means, such as through oral questions, parliamentary speeches or contributions made during committee meetings, are thus left unexplored. As a result, there is a possibility that by focusing exclusively on parliamentary questions for written answer, this dissertation has failed to notice and to take into account other activities undertaken by Members on behalf of individuals of immigrant-origin or that pertain to I.O. individuals.

While taking these considerations into account, there are further advantages to using questions for written answer than those mentioned above that make their usage more preferable in a study into substantive representation than these aforementioned alternatives. Firstly, these questions are more likely to reflect the individual identities of MPs (Franklin & Norton, 1993; Wiberg, 1995). Secondly, parties exercise less control over these questions than they do over other parliamentary activities (Kolpinskaya, 2017; Martin, 2011). As a result, these questions provide more nuanced insight into the attitudes of individual MPs (Martin, 2011). Lastly, they are often more substantial than questions for oral answer as they

232 enable MPs to submit complex questions with no limit on the amount of data that can be requested from ministers (Hansard, 2010). In addition, the other aforementioned forms of parliamentary activity can actually serve as more limited devices by which to examine substantive representation as they are subject to time constraints, queues and are reliant on Members catching the Speaker’s attention during parliamentary proceedings. Hence, questions for written answer empower MPs to develop and shape their own parliamentary agendas.

Over the course of this research, several other possible limitations relating to its research design have been observed. To begin with, the decision to use search terms to locate questions that exhibited evidence of substantive representation may have proven to be problematic because some questions demonstrating substantive representation may have gone unnoticed owing to the fact that these questions contained words and phrases that were not included in the respective search term dictionaries employed in the earlier chapters. This could have occurred, for instance, if an MP requested data from the government that concerned a breakdown of the ethnicity of members of staff in a particular department, agency or public service. While the MP is seeking to determine whether there has been possible discrimination in the recruitment of staff, the context or the motivation behind submitting the question may not be immediately apparent. While it is possible that certain questions demonstrating substantive representation have been left unobserved, the use of extensive search term dictionaries (as seen in Appendix II) has meant that it is likely that many, if not most questions that exhibited substantive representation in relation to the four policy areas analysed in this dissertation will not have gone unnoticed.

A further possible limitation depends on the view of the researcher in determining whether or not each of the questions identified using the search term searches sufficiently demonstrate substantive representation. This process is often subjective and entirely at the discretion of the individual(s) conducting the research. The earlier Methods chapter contains details about the criteria that were adopted when ascertaining whether or not questions that were located using search term searches did, in fact, show evidence of substantive representation. As documented in this chapter, one of the issues that was encountered when compiling these criteria was whether or not questions in which MPs were requesting basic information on a subject such as statistics and or other forms of data were deemed to be evidence of substantive representation as they may represent too much of a ‘low-cost’ activity. It was, however, decided that questions of this nature did, as discussed in the Methods chapter, merit inclusion because these types of questions often precede other questions from the same MP that addresses the topic of the original question more closely.

233

Another issue concerning this dissertation’s research design is that it does not include a critical test wherein the interests of white immigrant-origin communities and ethnic minorities are separate from one another. One way this could have been addressed was by taking two separate events or issues that pertain largely or exclusively to I.O. white communities and to ethnic minorities respectively and then to examine whether MPs substantively represented the interests of these two separate groups in relation to these selected issues or events.

When reflecting on the project, it is important to consider how and whether or not its findings would be different if alternative methods or measurements had been employed. One way in which the research design could have been amended is by expanding the use of corpus linguistics. However, the findings from the corpus linguistics analysis conducted as part of this dissertation suggest that more extensive use of other text-based analysis would have produced similar results to those presented in this study. This is because there is considerable overlap in the types of words and language used by MPs from both native and immigrant backgrounds when discussing matters relating to the policy areas under investigation.

In addition, it is possible that this thesis might have yielded different results had it used, as other research has done, issues traditionally associated with minorities as a means to measure substantive representation. By doing so, this may have found that immigrant-origin MPs were more likely than native MPs to have substantively represented the interests of the immigrant-origin population. Alternatively, these results may have observed that BAME MPs demonstrated a similar or an even greater tendency to substantively represent I.O. interests whereas immigrant-origin MPs may have been, as a whole, no more likely or less likely than native MPs to have substantively represented these interests.

Similarly, by using ‘minority’ and or ‘immigrant’ issues to measure substantive representation, this thesis may have produced findings concerning the effect that local factors had on how likely immigrant-origin MPs were to have substantively represented the interests of I.O. individuals that differed from those presented earlier in this dissertation. By doing so, different results could have been yielded because, as theorised earlier in the Conclusion, MPs who represented more cosmopolitan constituencies where higher proportions of residents were born abroad and or who are of non-white ethnicity may have looked to represent their constituents by highlighting issues and causes often regarded as immigrant and or minority issues.

Thirdly, by adopting a qualitative approach either instead of or in conjunction with the quantitative analysis employed in this dissertation by, for instance, using data gathered from interviews with Members of Parliament may have delivered results that could have helped to

234 further expand the study’s discussion on group consciousness. While this study has theorised that a level of group consciousness or solidarity exists among BAME MPs and cites empirical studies to support this theory, more data could have been amassed to substantiate this earlier discussion if interview data had been gathered as part of this thesis.

At this stage of the dissertation, it is worthwhile to return to the discussion found earlier in the text concerning the identification of ‘immigrant-origin’ interests and to reiterate that the interests that this study has ‘assigned’ to individuals of immigrant-origin will not, of course, pertain to everyone from an immigrant background equally. Rather, these interests will vary greatly depending on various factors such as an individual’s background and or their circumstances. Aside from obvious differences such as income, age and educational attainment level, immigrants to the United Kingdom may have different advantages and disadvantages linked to their ethnic and cultural backgrounds. For instance, research observes that the host population of the United Kingdom has shown a greater acceptance of, for example, Australian immigration than immigration from other parts of the world (Ford, Jennings & Somerville, 2015; Ford, 2011).

Documented evidence shows that, historically, there has been a lack of hostility in British society towards and discrimination against migrants from the ‘Anglosphere’ and many other white immigrants with the exception of the Irish (O’Keefe-Vigneron, 2003; Walter, 1999) and the Jews (Julius, 2010; Kushner, 2009). Consequently, this calls into question whether or not the interests of certain white immigrant-origin communities require the same amount of representation and attention from elected representatives, especially among those who belong to the second generation. As mentioned in earlier chapters, white people from an immigrant background tend to be ‘absorbed’ into the native population after one generation (Chong & Rogers, 2005) because, unlike individuals from a non-white background, immigrant-origin whites do not retain a clear and outward marker of distinctiveness, namely skin colour, which is not ‘lost’ between generations in the way that a foreign accent is lost. In the case of some immigrant groups, this ‘absorption’ into British society may even occur during the first generation, specifically among immigrants from nations considered to be culturally and linguistically close to the United Kingdom, as well as sharing, in some cases, a common heritage, such as the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the Republic of Ireland.

Through investigating the immigrant-origin population of the UK, this thesis has focused on both the country’s minority ethnic and white immigrant-origin populations. However, adopting this ‘dual’ approach has, at times, proved difficult owing to the fact that research into British citizens and residents who come from an immigrant background has typically focused on ethnic minorities and the ways in which they are disadvantaged in relation to the white

235 population. As has been documented in previous chapters, fewer empirical studies have explored, for example, instances of unfair treatment by police against white people who are of immigrant-origin (Phillips & Bowling, 2017) or I.O. whites’ experiences of prejudice and discrimination in the UK (Burrell, 2010; Fox, 2013). Consequently, it is more difficult to identify the interests of the white immigrant-origin population. This, in turn, makes it harder to investigate whether or not and the extent to which immigrant-origin MPs have substantively represented these interests.

Another issue that this dissertation has encountered concerns the four policy areas it has used to study the substantive representation of I.O. individuals. One possible critique of this selection is that it is easier to determine how these policy areas are more applicable to ethnic minorities and less relevant to white immigrant-origin communities. One of the problems when identifying and assigning interests to different groups as a means to study substantive representation, is that they will not apply to different immigrant communities equally.

That being said, while the interests of white immigrant-origin individuals and ethnic minorities in regard to policy may not always exactly align, it is important to acknowledge that interests will differ, both between and in some cases among, different ethnic minority communities in the UK. As the earlier chapter on labour market interests has demonstrated, rates of unemployment have varied between different ethnic groups. As a result, action and measures to highlight and to address unemployment are more relevant to groups which have traditionally suffered from higher rates of unemployment such as British Pakistanis as opposed to groups with lower rates of unemployment, such as British Indians (Catney & Sabater, 2015).

Similarly, as discussed in Chapter 7, questions over perceived unfairness in the CJS have tended to affect black and mixed-race males as opposed to females from the same ethnic backgrounds and individuals belonging to other ethnic groups more broadly (Phillips & Bowling, 2017; Webster, 2007). It is inevitable that the interests of certain I.O. communities will not necessarily mirror those of other I.O. communities. Furthermore, to echo the earlier discussion, interests will also depend on various factors such as cultural proximity to the native British population, English language proficiency, educational attainment, and socioeconomic class among others. It is nevertheless possible, as this study has done, to identify several issues and or areas of policy which apply to I.O. communities in a broad sense, although not to different I.O. communities to the same extent.

A further question which is important to consider when drawing this study to a close is the extent to which it is possible to generalise its findings. Across each of the policy area

236 chapters, it was noted that a recent immigrant background does not equate to Members providing substantive representation. However, in several cases, it was documented that non-white ethnicity was a determining factor in the likelihood of MPs to substantively represent the interests of individuals of immigrant-origin. As the former finding was consistent throughout, it is perhaps possible to assume that other research investigating, for instance, the association between the descriptive and substantive representation of I.O. individuals in relation to other policy areas, such as those which are discussed in the following section of this chapter, would produce similar results.

Opportunities for Future Research

While this dissertation finds that immigrant-origin MPs were not more likely to have substantively represented the interests of immigrant-origin individuals than native British MPs, further research could be conducted to determine whether this applies to other issues and policy areas where there are disparities between the native and immigrant-origin populations that were not examined in this dissertation. Examples of other policy areas in which there are documented disparities between native and immigrant-origin inhabitants of the UK include education; in particular, different levels of educational attainment across different groups (Lymperopoulou & Parameshwaran, 2015).

In addition, research has also observed disparities in the rates of school exclusion, which are disproportionately high among pupils from Afro-Caribbean and Gyspy/Traveller backgrounds (Daniels & Cole, 2010; Lloyd & McCluskey, 2008). Moreover, studies into housing have found disparities in the levels of homeownership, particularly among black people and immigrant-origin individuals of white ethnicity (Finney & Harries, 2013). Inequalities between the native and immigrant-origin populations have also been observed in the quality of housing (Bowes, Dar & Sim, 2002; Reeve & Robinson, 2007).

Furthermore, there are opportunities to look more closely at discrimination and other forms of prejudice and how responsive MPs are to these issues. Although this thesis has devoted a chapter to prejudice and discrimination, there are further opportunities to study this in greater depth as a body of research theorises that discrimination underpins at least part of the disadvantages that individuals from an immigrant background experience and have experienced in the United Kingdom, such as in the housing market (Carlsson & Eriksson, 2015) in schools (Daniels & Cole, 2010; Lloyd & McCluskey, 2008) and, as explored earlier, in the labour market (see, e.g., Currie, 2007; Heath & Cheung, 2007; Khattab & Fox, 2016). Moving on, this research could, as outlined previously in the Theory chapter, be adapted by

237 incorporating a means by which the theoretical concepts it discusses, namely levels of group consciousness and cross-group consciousness, could be further assessed and measured among immigrant-origin MPs.

Lastly, this project opens up additional new avenues for research from the findings that it has documented. It indicates, as shown in Chapter 6, that there are indicators of cross-group consciousness among I.O. MPs from an ethnic minority background. Further research could, however, be conducted that further broadens this investigation. This could, for example, be done by using parliamentary questions more extensively and or speeches as a means to try and determine these MPs’ attitudes to other types of prejudice, such as sexism and homophobia. Next, by showing that MPs are not motivated by constituency factors to submit questions relating to subjects that are in the interests of immigrant-origin individuals, this thesis calls into question the extent to which constituency factors influence how MPs represent group interests in Parliament.

Similarly, the results for the Marginality variable in Chapters 5-8 found that MPs were not motivated by electoral factors to table more questions addressing the policy areas featured in this study. This, in turn, challenges the assumption that the size of the electoral majority secured by MPs in the most recent election has little or no bearing on the types of questions that Members choose to put to ministers. A possible interpretation of this finding could be that MPs who hold more slender majorities are less inclined to use parliamentary questions and other parliamentary opportunities to cultivate and maintain support from constituents. Instead, these MPs may look to signal to constituents in other ways, by, for instance, prioritising constituency casework and by striving to maintain a ‘local presence’ in their constituencies. MPs may do this by championing local issues through social media, holding community meetings and regular surgeries and by taking part in door-to-door canvassing along with other constituency party members.

In closing this dissertation, I return to the question that has guided this study: have British MPs from an immigrant background been more likely to have substantively represented the interests of immigrant-origin members of the public than native British MPs? In other words, is there evidence of a relationship between descriptive and substantive representation in relation to immigrant-origin MPs and immigrant-origin individuals in wider British society?

As documented earlier, this thesis has, through the use of parliamentary questions for written answer tabled by MPs over the course of the 2010-15 Parliament, demonstrated that there was no relationship between the descriptive and substantive representation among immigrant-origin communities. Immigrant-origin MPs were no more likely and in some cases were less likely to have submitted questions that were in the interests of individuals from an

238 immigrant background. That being said, MPs from a minority ethnic background, who almost entirely qualify as immigrant-origin by the definition employed in this study, did, however, demonstrate a greater likelihood of substantively representing the interests of immigrant- origin individuals than white MPs.

These findings, therefore, offer partial support for the aforementioned argument found in normative literature which posits that groups underrepresented among political office holders are best represented by those with similar traits and characteristics to themselves. While the main finding of this dissertation challenges this argument by presenting evidence that descriptively underrepresented groups will not always have their interests best represented by descriptive representatives, the fact that BAME Members were more likely to have substantively represented the interests of immigrant-origin individuals demonstrates that there is evidence of a positive association between descriptive and substantive representation among immigrant-origin individuals in relation to groups traditionally underrepresented in political office.

These findings speak to the wider discussion about representation that can also be found outside academic circles. This particular discourse is centred on the belief that the election of more legislators from more diverse backgrounds is not only important for symbolic reasons, but also because there is a perception that legislators belonging to minority and or underrepresented groups will ‘do more’ to substantively represent individuals whom they descriptively represent. This study finds that this perception is, at least in part, empirically valid because in certain policy areas BAME MPs have demonstrated that they are more likely to substantively represent the interests of individuals of immigrant-origin.

Hence, this thesis has shown that while it is important to look ‘beyond the numbers’ of immigrant-origin MPs when examining the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation in relation to immigrant-origin individuals, the numbers of I.O. MPs themselves remain important for substantive outcomes in the political and legislative process.

239

Bibliography

Literature

Abbotts, J., Harding, S., & Cruickshank, K. (2004) ‘Cardiovascular Risk Profiles in UK-Born Caribbeans and Irish Living in England and Wales’, Atherosclerosis 175: 295-303. Al-Darmaki, F.R. (2003) ‘Attitudes Towards Seeking Professional Psychological Help: What Really Counts for United Arab Emirates University Students?, Social Behavior and Personality: An international Journal 31: 497-508. Allen, G., & Watson, C. (2017) UK Prison Population Statistics. House of Commons Library Briefing Paper No. SN/SG/04334. Aloud, N., & Rathur, A. (2009) ‘Factors Affecting Attitudes Toward Seeking and Using Formal Mental Health and Psychological Services Among Arab Muslim Populations’, Journal of Muslim Mental Health 4: 79-103. Anand, A.S., & Cochrane, R. (2005) ‘The Mental Health Status of South Asian Women in Britain: A Review of the UK Literature’, Psychology and Developing Societies 17: 195–214. Annesley, C. (2010) ‘Gender, Politics and Policy Change: The Case of Welfare Reform Under New Labour’, Government and Opposition 45: 50-72. Annesley, C., & Gains, F. (2010) ‘The Core Executive: Gender, Power and Change’, Political Studies 58: 909-929. Ansolabehere, S., & Jones, P.E. (2011) ‘Dyadic Representation’ in Edwards, G.C., Lee, F.E., & Schickler, E. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of the American Congress. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ashcroft, M. (2012) Degrees of Separation: Ethnic Minority Voters and the Conservative Party. London: Biteback Publishing. Bafumi, J., & Herron, M.C. (2010) ‘Leapfrog Representation and Extremism: A Study of American Voters and Their Members in Congress’, American Political Science Review 104: 519-42. Baker, P. (2006) Using Corpora in Discourse Analysis. London & New York: Continuum. Baker, P., Hardie, A., & McEnery, T. (2006) A Glossary of Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Bara, J. (2006) ‘The 2005 Manifestos: A Sense of Déjà Vu?’, Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties 16: 265-281. Bara, J., & Budge, I. (2001) ‘Party Policy and Ideology: Still New Labour?’, Parliamentary Affairs 54: 590–606. Bell, B., & Machin, S. (2011) The Impact of Migration on Crime and Victimisation. London: Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics. Bell, B., & Machin, S. (2013) Immigration and Crime: Evidence for the UK and Other Countries. Oxford: Migration Observatory, University of Oxford. Bell, B., Fasani, F., & Machin, S. (2013) ‘Crime and Immigration: Evidence from Large Immigrant Waves’, The Review of Economics and Statistics 95: 1279-90.

240

Bergh, J., & Bjørklund, T. (2011) ‘The Revival of Group Voting: Explaining the Voting Preferences of Immigrants in Norway’, Political Studies 59: 308-327. Berthoud, R. (2000) ‘Ethnic Employment Penalties in Britain’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 26: 389-416. Bhugra, D., & Jones, P. (2001) ‘Migration and Mental Health’, Advances in Psychiatric Treatment 7: 216-222. Bhugra, D. (2004) ‘Migration and Mental Health’, Acta Psychatrica Scandinavia 109: 243–258. Blackaby, D., Drinkwater, S., Leslie, D., & Murphy, P. (1997) ‘A Picture of Male and Female Unemployment Among Britain’s Ethnic Minorities’, Scottish Journal of Political Economy 44: 182- 197. Blackaby, D., Leslie, D., Murphy, P., & O’Leary, N. (1999) ‘Unemployment Among Britain’s Ethnic Minorities’, The Manchester School 67: 1-20. Boff, A. (2011) ‘Racial Justice Springs From Conservative Liberalism, Not “Muscular Liberalism”’ in Wind-Cowie, M. (eds.) Are We There Yet? A Collection on Race and Conservatism . London: Demos. Bonilla-Silva, E. (2006) Racism Without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in the United States 2nd Ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Bowes, A.M., Dar, N.S., & Sim, D.F. (2002) ‘Differentiation in Housing Careers: The Case of Pakistanis in the UK’, Housing Studies 17: 381-99. Bowling, B., Parmar, A., & Phillips, C. (2003) ‘Policing Ethnic Minority Communities’ in Newburn, T. (ed.) Handbook of Policing. Cullompton: Willan. Bowling, B., & Phillips, C. (2017) ‘Ethnicities, Racism, Crime, and Criminal Justice’ in Liebling, A., Maruna, S., & McAra, L. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology 6th Ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Boyd, J. (2015) Where Jewish Votes May Matter Most: The Institute for Jewish Policy Research Guide to the 2015 General Election in the UK. London: Institute for Jewish Policy Research (JPR). Bratton, K.A., & Ray, L.P. (2002) ‘Descriptive Representation, Policy Outcomes, and Municipal Day-Care Coverage in Norway’, American Journal of Political Science 46: 428-37. Broockman, D.E. (2013) ‘Black Politicians Are More Intrinsically Motivated to Advance Blacks' Interests: A Field Experiment Manipulating Political Incentives’, American Journal of Political Science 57: 521-536. Brown, M.K., Carnoy, M., Currie, E., Duster, T., Oppenheimer, D.B., Shultz, M.M., & Wellman, D. (2003) Whitewashing Race: The Myth of a Colour-Blind Society. Berkeley & Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press. Browning, C.S., & Tonra, B. (2010) ‘Beyond the West and Towards the Anglosphere?’ in Browning, C.S., & Lehti, M. (eds.) The Struggle for the West: A Divided and Contested Legacy. Abingdon & New York: Routledge. Budge, I., & Farlie, D.J. (1983) Explaining and Predicting Elections: Issue Effects and Party Strategies in Twenty-Three Democracies. London: George Allen and Unwin. Bullock, C.S. III, & MacManus, S.A. (1981) ‘Policy Responsiveness To the Black Electorate Programmatic Versus Symbolic Representation’, American Politics Quarterly 9: 357-68.

241

Bundey, S., Alam, H., Kaur, A., Mir, S., & Lancashire, R. (1991) ‘Why do UK‐born Pakistani Babies have High Perinatal and Neonatal Mortality Rates?’, Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology 5: 101-114. Butler, D., & Stokes, D. (1974) Political Change in Britain: Basis of Electoral Choice 2nd Ed. London & Basingstoke: Macmillan. Burrell, K. (2009) ‘Introduction: Migration to the UK from Poland: Continuity and Change in East- West Mobility’ in Burrell, K. (eds.) Polish Migration to the UK in the ‘New’ European Union: After 2004. Abingdon & New York: Routledge. Burrell, K. (2010) ‘Staying, Returning, Working and Living: Key Themes in Current Academic Research Undertaken in the UK on Migration Movements from Eastern Europe’, Social Identities, 16: 297-308. Cain, B.E., Kiewiet, D.R., & Uhlaner, C.J. (1991) ‘The Acquisition of Partisanship by Latinos and Asian Americans’, American Journal of Political Science 35: 390-422. Carlsson, M., & Eriksson, J. (2015) ‘Ethnic Discrimination in the London Market for Shared Housing’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 41: 1276-1301. Catney, G., & Sabater, A. (2015) Ethnic Minority Disadvantage in the Labour Market: Participation, Skills and Geographical Inequalities. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Celis, K. (2006) ‘Substantive Representation of Women: The Representation of Women's Interests and the Impact of Descriptive Representation in the Belgian Parliament’ (1900–1979)’, Journal of Women, Politics & Policy 28: 85-114. Celis, K. (2008) ‘Studying Women’s Substantive Representation in Legislatures: When Representative Acts, Contexts and Women’s Interests Become Important’, Representation 44: 111-23. Celis, K., & Childs, S. (2008) ‘Introduction: The Descriptive and Substantive Representation of Women: New Directions’, Parliamentary Affairs 61: 419-25. Childs, S., & Krook, M.L. (2006) ‘Should Feminists Give Up on Critical Mass? A Contingent Yes’, Politics & Gender 2: 522-30. Chong, D., & Rogers, R. (2005) ‘Reviving Group Consciousness’ in Wolbrecht, C., & Hero, R.E. (eds.) The Politics of Democratic Inclusion. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Clark, K., & Drinkwater, S. (2007) Ethnic Minorities in the Labour Market: Dynamics and Diversity. Bristol: Policy Press. Clark, A. (2012) Political Parties in the UK. Basingstoke: Macmillan. Clinton, J.D. (2006) ‘Representation in Congress: Constituents and Roll Calls in the 106th House’, The Journal of Politics 68: 397-409. Clucas, M. (2009) ‘The Irish Health Disadvantage in England: Contribution of Structure and Identity Component of Irish Ethnicity’, Ethnicity and Health 14: 553-73. Cochrane, R., & Bal, S.S. (1987) ‘Migration and Schizophrenia: An Examination of Five Hypotheses’, Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 22: 181-91. Cochrane, F. (2014) ‘The Future of the Union II: Northern Ireland’ in Benyon, J., Denver, D., & Fisher, J. (eds.) Central Debates in British Politics. Abingdon: Routledge. Coleman, D. (2013) Immigration, Population and Ethnicity: The UK in International Perspective. Oxford: Migration Observatory, University of Oxford. Converse, P.E., & Pierce, R. (1986) Political Representation in France. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

242

Copsey, N., Dack, J., Littler, M., & Feldman, M. (2013) Anti‐Muslim Hate Crime and the Far‐Right. Middlesbrough: Teeside University, Centre for Fascist, Anti‐Fascist and Post‐Fascist Studies. Corcoran, H., Lader, D., & Smith, K. (2015) Hate Crime, England and Wales 2014/15. Home Office Statistical Bulletin 05/15. Corcoran, H., & Smith, K. (2016) Hate Crime, England and Wales 2015/16. Home Office Statistical Bulletin 11/16. Cowley, P., & Stuart, M. (2012) ‘A Coalition with Two Wobbly Wings: Backbench Dissent in the House of Commons’, Political Insight 3: 8-11. Crewe, I. (1983) ‘Representation and the Ethnic Minorities in Britain’ in Glazer, N., & Young, K. (eds.) Ethnic Pluralism and Public Policy: Achieving Equality in the United States and Britain. London: Heinemann. Criddle, B. (2010) ‘More Diverse, Yet More Uniform: MPs and Candidates’ in Kavanagh, D., & Cowley, P. (eds.) The British General Election of 2010. London: Palgrave. Cutts, D., Ford, R., & Goodwin, M. (2011) ‘Anti-immigrant, Politically Disaffected or Still Racist After All? Examining the Attitudinal Drives of Extreme Right Support in Britain in the 2009 European Elections’, European Journal of Political Research 50: 418-440. Currie, S. (2007) ‘De-Skilled and Devalued: The Labour Market Experience of Polish Migrants in the UK Following EU Enlargement’, The International Journal of Comparative Law and Industrial Relations 23: 83-116. Dale, A., Shaheen, N., Kalra, V., & Fieldhouse, E. (2002) ‘Routes into Education and Employment for Young Pakistani and Bangladeshi Women in the UK’, Ethnic and Racial Studies 25: 942-68. Dancygier, R. (2017) Dilemmas of Inclusion: Muslims in European Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Dancygier, R., & Saunders, E.N. (2006) ‘A New Electorate? Comparing Preferences and Partisanship Between Immigrants and Natives’, American Journal of Political Science 50: 962-81. Dancygier, R.M., Lindgren, C-O., Oskarsson, S., & Vernby, K. (2015) ‘Why Are Immigrants Underrepresented in Politics? Evidence from Sweden’, American Political Science Review 109: 703-24. Daniels, H., & Cole, T. (2010) ‘Exclusion From School: Short-Term Setback or a Long Term of Difficulties?’, European Journal of Special Needs 25: 115-30. Das-Munshi, J., Clark, C., Dewey, M.E., Leavey, G., Stansfeld, S.A., & Prince, M.J. (2013) ‘Does Childhood Adversity Account for Poorer Mental Health in Second Generation Irish People Living in Britain? Birth Cohort Study from Britain (NCDS)’, BMJ Open 3: 1-10. Dawson, M.C. (1994) Behind the Mule: Race and Class in African-American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. de Wilde, P. (2013) ‘Representative Claims Analysis: Theory Meets Method’, Journal of European Public Policy 20: 278-94. Di Stasio, V., & Heath, A. (2019) Are Employers in Britain Discriminating Against Ethnic Minorities? GEMM Project Briefing Note. Dodson, D.L., & Carroll, S.J. (1991) Reshaping the Agenda: Women in State Legislatures: Report. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for the American Woman and Politics (CAWP), Eagleton Institute of Politics, Rutgers University.

243

Dovi, S. (2002) ‘Preferable Descriptive Representatives: Will Just Any Woman, Black, or Latino Do?’, American Political Science Review 96: 729-43. Dovi, S. (2007) The Good Representative. Oxford: Blackwell. Dustmann, C., & Fabbri, F. (2003) ‘Language Proficiency and Labour Market Performance of Immigrants in the UK’, The Economic Journal 113: 695-717. Dustmann, C., Fabbri, F., & Preston, I. (2005) ‘The Impact of Immigration on the British Labour Market’, The Economic Journal 115: 324-41. Edge, D., Baker, D., & Rogers, A. (2004) ‘Perinatal Depression Among Black Caribbean Women’, Health and Social Care 12: 430-38. El-Khair, I.A. (2006) ‘Effects of Stop Words Elimination for Arabic Information Retrieval: A Comparative Study’, International Journal of Computing and Information Sciences 4: 119-33. Esmail, A., & Everington, S. (1993) ‘Racial Discrimination Against Doctors from Ethnic Minorities’, British Medical Journal 306: 691–2. Eulau, H., Wahlke, J.C., Buchanan, W., & Ferguson, L.C. (1959) ‘The Role of the Representative: Some Empirical Observations on the Theory of Edmund Burke’, American Political Science Review 53: 742-56. Fenno, R.F. (2003) Going Home: Black Representatives and Their Constituents. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Fieldhouse, E., & Sobolewska, M. (2013) ‘Introduction: Are British Ethnic Minorities Politically Under-represented?’, Parliamentary Affairs 66: 235-45. Finney, N., & Harries, B. (2013) How has the Rise in Private Renting Disproportionately Affected Some Ethnic Groups? Ethnic Differences in Housing Tenure 1991-2001-2011. Manchester: ESRC Centre on Dynamics of Ethnicity, University of Manchester. FitzGerald, M. (1987) Black People and Party Politics in Britain. London: Runnymede Trust. Fitzgerald, M., & Hale, C. (1996) Ethnic Minorities, Victimisation and Racial Harassment. London: Home Office, Research and Statistics Department. Flatley, J., Kershaw, C., Smith, K., Chaplin, R., & Moon, D. (2010) Crime in England and Wales 2009/10: Findings from the British Crime Survey, Home Office Statistical Bulletin 12/10. London: Home Office. Ford, R. (2011) ‘Acceptable and Unacceptable Immigrants: How Opposition to Immigration in Britain is Affected by Migrants' Region of Origin’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 37: 1017-37. Ford, R., Jennings, W., & Somerville, W. (2015). ‘Public Opinion, Responsiveness and Constraint: Britain's Three Immigration Policy Regimes’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 41: 1391- 1411. Fox, J.E. (2013) ‘The Uses of Racism: Whitewashing New Europeans in the UK’, Ethnic and Racial Studies 36: 1871-89. Fox, J.E., Morosanu, L., & Szilassy, E., (2012) ‘The Racialisation of the New European Migration to the UK’, Sociology 46: 680-95. Fox, J.E., Morosanu, L., & Szilassy, E. (2015) ‘Denying Discrimination: Status, “Race”, and the Whitening of Britain’s New Europeans’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 41: 729-48. Franklin, M.N., & Norton, P. (1993) ‘Questions and Members’ in Franklin, M.N., & Norton, P. (eds) Parliamentary Questions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

244

Frijters, P., Shields, M.A., & Wheatley Price, S. (2005) ‘Job Search Methods and Their Success: A Comparison of Immigrants and Natives in the UK’, The Economic Journal 115: 359-76. Gamble, K.L. (2007) ‘Black Political Representation: An Examination of Legislative Activity Within US House Committees’, Legislative Studies Quarterly 32: 421-47. Geese, L., Goldbach, W., & Saalfeld, T. (2016) ‘Mobility and Representation: Legislators of Non- European Origin in the British House of Commons, 2001-2015’ in Panter, S. (ed.) Mobility and Biography. Berlin: De Gruyter. Gonçalves, P., Araujo, M., Benevenuto, F., & Cha, M. (2013) ‘Comparing and Combining Sentiment Analysis Methods’. In Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Online Social Networks, pp. 27—38. Hakhverdian, A. (2015) ‘Does it Matter that Most Representatives are Higher Educated?’, Swiss Political Science Review 21:237-45.

Hänni, M. (2016) ‘Presence, Representation and Impact: How Minority MPs Affect Policy Outcomes’, Legislative Studies Quarterly 42: 97–130. Harrison, G., Owens, D., Holton, A., & Neilson, D. (1988) ‘A Prospective Study of Severe Mental Disorder in Afro-Caribbean Patients’, Psychological Medicine 18: 643-57. Harrison, G., Glazebrook, C., Brewin, J., & Cantwell, R. (1997) ‘Increased Incidence of Psychotic Disorders in Migrants From the Caribbean and the United Kingdom’, Psychological Medicine 27: 799-806. Hatton, T.J., & Tani, M. (2005) ‘Immigration and Inter-Regional Mobility in the UK, 1982-2000’ The Economic Journal 115: 342-58. Heath, A.F., Jowell, R., Curtice, J., Evans, G., Field, J., & Witherspoon, S. (1991) Understanding Political Change: The British Voter 1964-87. Oxford: Pergamon. Heath, A. & Yu, S. (2005) ‘Explaining Ethnic Minority Disadvantage’ in Heath, A., Ermisch, J., & Gallie, D. (eds.) Understanding Social Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 187-224. Heath, A. and Cheung, S.Y. (2007) (eds.) Unequal Chances: Ethnic Minorities in Western Labour Markets. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Heath, A.F., Fisher, S.D., Rosenblatt, G., Sanders, D., & Sobolewska, M. (2013). The Political Integration of Ethnic Minorities in Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hickman, M.J. (1998) ‘Reconstructing Deconstructing “Race”: British Political Discourses about the Irish in Britain’, Ethnic and Racial Studies 21: 288-307. Hickman, M. (2000) ‘“Binary Opposites” or “Unique Neighbours”? The Irish in Multi-ethnic Britain’, The Political Quarterly 71: 50-8. Holmberg, S. (1997) ‘Dynamic Opinion Representation’, Scandinavian Political Studies 20:265- 83. Hopkins, K. (2015) Associations Between Police-Recorded Ethnic Background and Being Sentenced to Prison in England and Wales. London: Ministry of Justice (MoJ). Htun, M. (2004) ‘Is Gender Like Ethnicity? The Political Representation of Identity Groups’, Perspectives on Politics 2: 439-58. Htun, M., & Weldon, S.L. (2010) ‘When Do Governments Promote Women's Rights? A Framework for the Comparative Analysis of Sex Equality Policy’, Perspectives on Politics 8: 207- 16.

245

Htun, M.. & Weldon, S.L. (2012) ‘The Civic Origins of Progressive Policy Change: Combating Violence against Women in Global Perspective, 1975-2005’, American Political Science Review 106: 548-69. Jackson, J.E., & King, D.C. (1989) ‘Public Goods, Private Interests, and Representation’, American Political Science Review 8: 1143-64. James, Z. (2006) ‘Policing Space: Managing New Travellers in England’, British Journal of Criminology 46: 470-85. James, Z. (2013) ‘Offenders or Victims?: An Exploration of Gypsies and Travellers as a Policing Paradox’ in Phillips, C., & Webster, C. (eds.) New Directions in Race, Ethnicity and Crime London: Routledge. Jansson, K. (2006) Black and Minority Ethnic Groups’ Experiences and Perceptions of Crime, Racially Motivated Crime and the Police: Evidence from the 2004/05 British Crime Survey. Home Office Online Report 25/06. Jansson, K., Budd, S., Lovbakke, J., Morley, S., & Thorpe, K. (2007) Attitudes, Perceptions and Risks of Crime: Supplementary Vol. 1 to Crime in England and Wales 2006/07, 2nd Ed. Home Office Statistical Bulletin 19/07. John, P., Bertelli, A., Jennings, W., & Bevan, S. (2013) Policy Agendas in British Politics. London & New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Jivraj, S., & Khan, O. (2013) Ethnicity and Deprivation in England: How Likely are Ethnic Minorities to Live in Deprived Neighbourhoods? Manchester: ESRC Centre on Dynamics of Ethnicity, University of Manchester. Jones, S.H., O’Toole, T., Nilsson DeHanas, D., Modood, T., & Meer, N. (2015) ‘A “System of Self-Appointed Leaders”? Examining Modes of Muslim Representation in Governance in Britain’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations 17: 207-23. Judge, D. (1999) Representation: Theory and Practice in Britain. London: Routledge. Julius, A. (2010) Trials of the Diaspora: A History of Anti-Semitism in England. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kadish, S. (1992) Bolsheviks and British Jews: The Anglo-Jewish Community, Britain and the Russian Revolution. London: Frank Cass. Karlsen, S., & Nazroo, J. (2009) ‘Religion, Ethnicity and Health Inequalities’ in Graham, H. (ed.) Understanding Health Inequalities 2nd Ed. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Kelleher, D., & Hillier, S. (1996) ‘The Health of the Irish in England’ in Kelleher, D. & Hillier, S. (eds.) Researching Cultural Differences in Health. London & New York: Routledge. Khattab, N., & Fox, J.E. (2016) ‘Eastern Eastern Immigrants Responding to the Recession in Britain: Is There a Trade-Off Between Unemployment and Over-Qualification?, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 42: 1774-89. Kilson, M. (2014) Transformation of the African American Intelligentsia, 1880–2012. Cambridge, MA & London: Harvard University Press. Knights, M. (2009) ‘Participation and Representation by Democracy: Petitions and Addresses in Premodern Britain’ in Shapiro, I., Stokes, S.C., Wood, E.J., & Kirschner, A.S. (eds.) Political Representation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kolpinskaya, E. (2017) ‘Substantive Religious Representation in the UK Parliament: Examining Parliamentary Questions for Written Answers, 1997–2012’, Parliamentary Affairs 70: 111-31.

246

Koopmans, R. (2007) ‘Who Inhabits the European Public Sphere? Winners and Losers, Supporters and Opponents in Europeanised Political Debates’, European Journal of Political Research 46: 183-210. Koopmans, R., & Statham, P. (1999) Political Claims Analysis: Integrating Protest Event and Political Discourse Approaches. Mobilization: An International Quarterly 4: 203-221. Krook, M.L. (2010) ‘Why Are Fewer Women than Men Elected? Gender and the Dynamics of Candidate Selection’, Political Studies Review 8:155-68. Krook, M.L., & O'Brien, D.Z. (2010) ‘The Politics of Group Representation: Quotas for Women and Minorities Worldwide’, Comparative Politics: 253-72. Kushner, T. (2009) Anglo-Jewry Since 1066: Place, Locality and Memory. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Lakasing, E., & Mirza, Z.A. (2009) ‘The Death of Britain’s Polish Migrants: A Suitable Case for History Taking and Examination’, British Journal of General Practitioners 59: 138-39. Layton-Henry, Z. (1990) ‘Black Electoral Participation: An Analysis of Recent Trends’ in Goulbourne, H. (ed.) Black Politics in Britain. Aldershot: Gower. Leavey, G. (1999) ‘Suicide and Irish Migrants in Britain: Identity and Integration’, International Review of Psychiatry 11: 168-72. Lentin, A. (2016) ‘Eliminating Race Obscures its Trace: Theories of Race and Ethnicity Symposium’, Ethnic and Racial Studies 39: 383-91. Lewis, A.E. (2003) Race in the Schoolyard: Negotiating the Color Line in Classrooms and Communities. Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Lewis, G. (2003) ‘Black-White Differences in Attitudes Toward Homosexuality and Gay Rights’, Public Opinion Quarterly 67: 59-78. Lindert, L., Schouler-Ocak, M., Heinz, A., & Priebe, S. (2008) ‘Mental Health, Healthcare Utilisation of Migrants in Europe’, European Psychiatry 23: 14-20. Lloyd, G., & McCluskey, G. (2008) ‘Education and Gypsies/Travellers: “Contradictions and Significant Silences”’, International Journal of Inclusive Education 12: 331-45. Lymperopoulou, K., & Parameshwaran, M. (2015) ‘Is There an Ethnic Group Education Gap?’ in Jivraj, S., & Simpson, L. (eds.) Ethnic Inequalities in Britain: The Dynamics of Diversity. Bristol: Policy Press. Macpherson, W. (1999) ‘The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry, Report of an Inquiry by Sir William Macpherson of Cluny, advised by Tom Cook, The Rt. Revd. Dr. John Sentamu and Dr. Richard Stone, Cm 4261-1. London: The Stationery Office. MacRaild, D.M. (1999) Irish Migrants in Modern Britain, 1750-1922. Basingstoke & London: Macmillan. Mansbridge, J. (1999) Should Blacks Represent Blacks and Women Represent Women? A Contingent “Yes” ’, Journal of Politics 61: 628-57. Mansbridge, J. (2003) ‘Rethinking Representation’, American Political Science Review 97: 515– 28. Mansbridge, J. (2011) ‘Clarifying the Concept of Representation’, American Political Science Review 105: 621–30.

247

Martin, J., Heath, A., & Bosveld, K. (2010) Is Ethnicity or Religion More Important in Explaining Inequalities in the Labour Market? Working Papers in Sociology 2010-12, Oxford: University of Oxford. Martin, S. (2011) ‘Using Parliamentary Questions to Measure Constituency Focus: An Application to the Irish Case’, Political Studies 59: 472-88. McBean, A.M., Li, S., Gilbertson, D.T., & Collins, A.J. (2004) ‘Differences in Diabetes Prevalence, Incidence, and Mortality Among the Elderly of Four Racial/Ethnic Groups: Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians’, Diabetes Care 27: 2317-24. McDowell, L. (2009) ‘Old and New European Economic Migrants: Whiteness and Managed Migration Policies’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 35: 19–36. McKay, S. (2016) ‘The Dimensions and Effects of the Labour Migration in the UK’ in Galgóczi, B., Leschte, J., & Watt, A. (eds.) EU Labour Migration since Enlargement: Trends, Impacts and Policies. Abingdon & New York: Routledge. McKee, R. (2017) ‘The Substantive Representation of Ethnic Minorities in the UK Parliament’ PhD diss. University of Manchester. Meier, K.J., & England R.E. (1984) ‘Black Representation and Educational Policy: Are They Related?’ American Political Science Review 78: 392-403. Miller, W.E., & Stokes, D.E. (1963) ‘Constituency Influence in Congress’, American Political Science Review 57: 45-56. Miller, A.H., Gurin, P., Gurin, G., & Malanchuk, O. (1981). 'Group Consciousness and Political Participation', American Journal of Political Science 25: 494-511. Mudde, C. (2017) ‘Introduction to the Populist Radical Right’ in Mudde, C. (ed.) The Populist Radical Right: A Reader. Oxford & New York, NY: Routledge. Nazroo, J.Y., & Kapadia, D. (2013a) Ethnic Inequalities in Labour Market Participation? Manchester: ESRC Centre on Dynamics of Ethnicity, University of Manchester. Nazroo, J.Y., & Kapadia, D. (2013b) Have Ethnic Inequalities in Employment Persisted Between 1991 and 2011? Manchester: ESRC Centre on Dynamics of Ethnicity, University of Manchester. Newburn, T., Shiner, M., & Hayman, S. (2004) ‘Race, Crime and Injustice? Strip Search and Treatment of Suspects in Custody’, British Journal of Criminology 44: 677-94. Nixon, J. (1998) ‘The Role of Black and Asian MPs at Westminster’ in Saggar, S. (ed.) Race and British Electoral Politics. London: UCL Press. Norton, P. (1997) ‘Roles and Behaviour of British MPs’, The Journal of Legislative Studies 3: 17- 31. Núñez, I., & Livanos, I. (2010) ‘Higher Education and Unemployment in Europe: An Analysis of the Academic Subject and National Effects’, Higher Education 59: 475-87. O’Keefe–Vigneron, G. (2003) ‘The Irish in Britain: Injustices of Recognition?’ Sources: Revue études anglophones Ed. Paradigme. Ondaatje, M.L. (2011) Black Conservative Intellectuals in Modern America. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Papadopoulos, G. (2012) Immigrant Status and Victimisation: Evidence from the British Crime Survey. Applied and Financial Economics Working Papers Series, School of Economics, University of East Anglia No. 42. Parekh, B.C. (2000) The Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain: Report of the Commission on the Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain. London: Profile Books Ltd.

248

Parmar, A. (2014) ‘Ethnicities, Racism, and Crime in England and Wales’ in Bucerius, S.M., & Tonry, M.H. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Ethnicity, Crime and Immigration. Oxford: University Press. Petrocik, J.R. (1996) ‘Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study’, American Journal of Political Science 40: 825-50. Phillips, A. (1995) The Politics of Presence. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Phillips, A. (1998) ‘Democracy and Representation: Or, Why Should It Matter Who Our Representatives Are?’ in Phillips, A. (ed.) Feminism and Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Phillips, C., & Bowling, B. (2007) ‘Ethnicities, Racism, and Criminal Justice’ in Maguire, M., Morgan, R., & Reiner, R., (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology 4th Ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Phillips, C., & Bowling, B. (2017) ‘Ethnicities, Racism, Crime, and Criminal Justice’ in Liebling, A., Maruna, S., & McAra, L. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology 6th Ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Phillips, C., & Webster, C. (2013) ‘Introduction: Bending the Paradigm – New Directions and New Generations’ in Phillips, C. & Webster, C. (eds.) New Directions in Race, Ethnicity and Crime London: Routledge. Pitkin, H.F. (1967) The Concept of Representation. Berkeley & Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press. Preuhs, R.R. (2006) ‘The Conditional Effects of Minority Descriptive Representation: Black Legislators and Policy Influence in the American States’, Journal of Politics 68: 585-99. Quinn, T. (2008) ‘The Conservative Party and the “Centre Ground” of British Politics’, Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties 18: 179-99. Raleigh, V.S. (1997) ‘Diabetes and Hypertension in Britain's Ethnic Minorities: Implications for the Future of Renal Services’, BMJ: British Medical Journal 314: 209-19. Ray, G.B. (2009) Language and Interracial Communication in the United States: Speaking in Black and White. New York: Peter Lang. Reeve, K., & Robinson, D. (2007) ‘Beyond the Multiethnic Metropolis: Minority Ethnic Housing Experiences in Small Town England’, Housing Studies 22: 547-71. Rehfeld, A. (2005) The Concept of Constituency: Political Representation, Democratic Legitimacy and Institutional Design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rehfeld, A. (2006) ‘Towards a General Theory of Political Representation’, Journal of Politics 68: 1–21. Rehfeld, A. (2009) ‘Representation Rethought: On Trustees, Delegates, and Gyroscopes in the Study of Political Representation and Democracy’, American Political Science Review 103: 214– 30. Rehfeld, A. (2011) ‘The Concepts of Representation’, American Political Science Review 105: 131-41. Reiner, R. (2010) The Politics of the Police 4th Ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Renton, D. (2005) ‘A Day to Make History? The 2004 Elections and the British National Party’, Patterns of Prejudice 39: 25-45. Reynolds, L., & Birdwell, J. (2015) Rising to the Top. London: Demos.

249

Rich, D. (2016) The Left’s Jewish Problem: Jeremy Corbyn, Israel and Anti-Semitism. London: Biteback. Roberts, C., & Campbell, S. (2006) Talk on Trial: Job Interviews, Language and Ethnicity. Department for Work & Pensions Research Report 344, London DWP. Rossetti, P., Dinisman, T., & Maroz, A. (2016) Insight Report: An Easy Target? Risk Factors Affecting Victimisation Rates for Violent Crime and Theft. Charity Victim Support. Russo, F., & Wiberg, M. (2010) ‘Parliamentary Questioning in 17 European Parliaments: Some Steps towards Comparison’, The Journal of Legislative Studies 16: 215-32. Rzepnikowska, A. (2019) ‘Racism and Xenophobia Experience by Polish Migrants in the UK Before and After Brexit Vote’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 45: 61-77. Saalfeld, T. (2011) ‘Parliamentary Questions as Instruments of Substantive Representation: Visible Minorities in the UK House of Commons, 2005–10’, The Journal of Legislative Studies 17: 271-89. Saalfeld, T., & Bischof, D. (2013) ‘Minority-Ethnic MPs and the Substantive Representation of Minority Interests in the House of Commons, 2005–2011’, Parliamentary Affairs 66: 305-28. Saalfeld, T., & Kyriakopoulou, K., (2011) ‘Presence and Behaviour: Black and Minority Ethnic MPs in the British House of Commons’ in Bird, K. Saalfeld, T. & Wust, A.M. (eds.) The Political Representation of Immigrants and Minorities: Voters, Parties in Liberal Democracies. Abingdon & New York, NY: Routledge. Saalfeld, T., & Müller, W.C. (1997) ‘Roles in Legislative Studies: A Theoretical Introduction’, The Journal of Legislative Studies 3: 1-16. Saggar, S. (2000) Race and Representation: Electoral Politics and Ethnic Pluralism in Britain. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press. Salisbury, H., & Upson, A. (2004) Ethnicity, Victimisation and Worry About Crime: Findings from the 2001/02 and 2002/03 British Crime Survey. Home Office Research Findings No. 237. London: Home Office. Sanchez, G.R., & Masuoka, N. (2010) ‘Brown-Utility Heuristic? The Presence and Contributing Factors of Latino Linked Fate’, Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 32: 519-31. Sanders, D., Heath, A., Fisher, S., & Sobolewska, M. (2014) ‘The Calculus of Ethnic Minority Voting in Britain’, Political Studies 62: 230-51. Sapiro, V. (1981) ‘Research Frontier Essay: When Are Interests Interesting? The Problem of Political Representation of Women’, American Political Science Review 75: 701-16. Saward, M. (2006) ‘The Representative Claim’, Contemporary Political Theory 5: 297-318. Saward, M. (2009) ‘Authorisation and Authenticity: Representation and the Unelected’, The Journal of Political Philosophy 17: 1-22. Saward, M. (2010) The Representative Claim. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Scase, R., & Goffee, R. (2015) The Real World of the Small Business Owner. Abingdon: Routledge. Searing, D.D. (1985) ‘The Role of the Good Constituency Member and the Practice of Representation in Great Britain’, Journal of Politics 47: 348-81. Searing, D.D. (1994) Westminster’s World: Understanding Political Roles. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

250

Simmons, J., & Dodd, T. (2003) Crime in England and Wales 2002/03. Home Office Statistical Bulletin 07/03. London: Home Office. Smith, C.S. Jr. (2007) ‘Multiple Risk Factors of Cardiovascular Disease and Diabetes Mellitus’ The American Journal of Medicine 120: S3-S11. Smith, D., & Greenfields, M. (2012) ‘Housed Gypsies and Travellers in the UK: Work, Exclusion and Adaption’, Race & Class 53: 48-64. Smith, J.M. (2014) ‘Interrogating Whiteness Within Criminology’, Sociology Compass 8: 107-18. Sobolewska, M. (2005) ‘Ethnic Agenda: Relevance of Political Attitudes to Party Choice’, Journal of Elections, Public Opinion & Parties 15: 197-214. Sobolewska, M. (2013) ‘Party Strategies and the Descriptive Representation of Ethnic Minorities: The 2010 British General Election’, West European Politics 36: 615-33. Sobolewska, M. (2017) ‘Race, Ethnicity and Elections: From Recognisable Patterns to Generalised Theories’ in Arzheimer, K., Evans, J., & Lewis-Beck, M.S. (eds.) Sage Handbook of Electoral Behaviour. London: Sage. Sobolewska, M., Fieldhouse, E., & Cutts, D. (2013) ‘Taking Minorities for Granted? Ethnic Density, Party Campaigning and Targeting Minority Voters in 2010 British General Elections’, Parliamentary Affairs 66: 329-44. Sobolewska, M., McKee, R., & Campbell, R. (2018) ‘Explaining Motivation to Represent: How Does Descriptive Representation Lead to Representative of Racial and Ethnic Minorities?’, West European Politics 41: 1-25. Spencer, I.R.G. (1997) British Immigration Policy Since 1939: The Making of Multi-Racial Britain. London: Routledge.

Statham, P. (1999) ‘Political Mobilisation by Minorities in Britain: Negative Feedback of ‘Race Relations?’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 25: 597-626.

Stokes, A.K. (2003) ‘Latino Group Consciousness and Political Participation’, American Politics Research 31: 361-78. Stokes-Brown, A.K. (2006) ‘Racial Identity and Latino Vote Choice’, American Politics Research 34: 627-52. Studlar, D.T. (1986) ‘Non-White Policy Preferences, Political Participation and the Political Agenda in Britain’, in Layton-Henry, Z., & Rich, P. (eds.) Race, Government and Politics in Britain. Basingstoke & London: Macmillan. Sun, L.Y., Lee, E.W., Zahra, A., & Park, J.H. (2015) ‘Risk Factors of Cardiovascular Disease and Their Related Socio-Economical, Environmental and Health Behavioral Factors: Focused Low- Middle Income Countries – A Narrative Review Article’, Iranian Journal of Public Health 44: 435- 44. Swain, C.M. (1993) Black Faces, Black Interests. The Representation of African Americans in Congress. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Tate, K. (1993) From Protest to Politics: The New Black Voters in American Politics. Cambridge, MA & London: Harvard University Press. Tate, K. (2003) Black Faces in the Mirror: African Americans and Their Representatives in the US Congress. Princeton & Oxford: Princeton University Press. Thorpe, D.R. (2011) Supermac: The Life of Harold Macmillan. London: Pimlico

251

Tillin, T., et al. (2013) ‘Insulin Resistance and Truncal Obesity as Important Determinants of the Greater Incidence of Diabetes in Indian Asians and African Caribbeans Compared With Europeans: The Southall and Brent Revisited (SABRE) Cohort’, Diabetes Care 36: 383-93. Tran, H. (2016) ‘Colour Blindness and the Permanence of Whiteness’ in Frankenberg, E., Garces, L.M., & Hopkins, M. (eds.) School Integration Matters: Research-Based Strategies to Advancing Equity. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Ujcic-Voortman, J.K., Schram, M.T., Jacobs-van der Bruggen, M.A., Verhoeff, A.P., & Baan, C.A. (2009) ‘Diabetes Prevalence and Risk Factors Among Ethnic Minorities’, The European Journal of Public Health 19: 511-15. Urbinati, N., & Warren, M.E. (2008) ‘The Concept of Representation in Contemporary Democratic Theory’, Annual Review of Political Science 11: 387-412. Vargas-Silva, C., & Markaki, Y. (2017) Briefing: EU Migration to and from the UK, 5th Revision. Oxford: Migration Observatory. Verba, S., & Nie, N.H. (1972) Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social Equality. New York: Harper and Row. Vieira, M.B. & Runciman, D. (2008) Representation. Cambridge, UK & Malden, MA: Polity Press. Waddington, P.A.J., Stenson, K., & Don, D. (2004) ‘In Proportion: Race and Police Stop and Search’, British Journal of Criminology 44: 889-914. Wahlke, J.C., Eulau, H., Buchanan, W., & Ferguson, L.C. (1962) The Legislative System: Explorations in Legislative Behaviour. New York: Wiley. Walter, B. (1999) The Irish Community: Diversity, Disadvantage and Discrimination. Paper Presented to the Commission on the Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain. Wängnerud, L. (2009) ‘Women in Parliaments: Descriptive and Substantive Representation’, Annual Review of Political Science 12: 51-69. Webster, C. (2007) Understanding Race and Crime. Open University Press: Maidenhead. Weich, S., et al. (2004) ‘Common Mental Health Disorders and Ethnicity in England: The EPIRIC Study’, Psychological Medicine 34: 1543–51. Weissberg, R. (1978) ‘Collective vs. Dyadic Representation in Congress’, American Political Science Review 72: 535-47. Whitby, K.J. (1997) The Color of Representation: Congressional Behavior and Black Constituents. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Wiberg, M. (1995) ‘Parliamentary Questioning: Control by Communication?’ in Döring, H. (ed.) Parliaments and Majority Rule in Western Europe. Frankfurt am Main & New York: St. Martin’s Press. Wilbur, W.J., & Sirotkin, K. (1992) ‘The Automatic Identification of Stop Words’, Journal of Information Science 18: 45-55. Wilcox, C. (1990) ‘Race, Gender Role Attitudes and Support for Feminism’, The Western Political Quarterly 43: 113-21. Wildman, S.M. (1996) Privilege Revealed: How Invisible Preference Undermines America. New York & London: NYU Press. Williams, M. (1998) Voice, Trust, and Memory: Marginalized Groups and the Failings of Liberal Representation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

252

Winkleby, M.A., Jatulis, D.E., Frank, E., & Fortmann, S.P. (1992) ‘Socioeconomic Status and Health: How Education, Income, and Occupation Contribute to Risk Factors for Cardiovascular Disease’, American Journal of Public Health 82: 816-20. Wintemute, R. (2016) ‘Goodbye EU Anti-Discrimination Law? Hello Repeal of the Equality Act 2010?’, King’s Law Journal 27: 387-97. Wolfinger, R.E. (1965) ‘The Development and Persistence of Ethnic Voting’, American Political Science Review 59: 896-908. Wood, M., Hales, J., Purdon, S., Sejersen, T., & Hayllar, O. (2009) A Test for Racial Discrimination in Recruitment Practices in British Cities. Department for Work & Pensions Research Report No. 607, London: DWP. Young, I.M. (1990) Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Young, J. (1994) Policing the Streets: Stops and Search in North London. London: Centre for Criminology. Middlesex University.

Media Sources

Cowburn, A. (2018) ‘Lewisham East byelection: Janet Daby wins Labour candidacy after pledging to fight for single market membership’, Independent 19 May. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/lewisham-east-byelection-latest-janet-daby-hard- brexit-labour-candidacy-win-a8359306.html (accessed 10 April 2019). Hurst, P., & Keely, A. (2009) ‘BNP Gains “Damaging UK's Reputation”’, Independent 8 June. https://my.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/bnp-gains-damaging-uks-reputation-1699490.html (accessed 20 February 2018).

Katwala, S. (2017) ’52 Minority MPs to Sit in “Most Diverse UK Parliament Ever”’ British Future http://www.britishfuture.org/articles/52-minority-mps-to-sit-in-most-diverse-uk-parliament-ever/ (accessed 24 January 2019). Maybin, S. (2016) ‘How Many Britons are Entitled to an Irish Passport?’ BBC News https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-37246769 (accessed 1 July 2019). Savage, P. (2013) ‘Irish Immigrants on the Decline in England and Wales’ BBC News https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-20821292 (accessed 1 July 2019).

253

Appendices

Appendix I: Immigrant-Origin MPs Serving During the 2010-15 Parliament

Table A1. 1. White Immigrant-Origin MPs MP Party Constituency Family Background Hilary Benn Labour Leeds Central American mother

Sir Paul Beresford Conservative Mole Valley New Zealand- born Nicola Blackwood Conservative Oxford West and South African- Abingdon born to a British father & a South African mother Nick Clegg Liberal Democrat Sheffield, Hallam Dutch mother Mary Creagh Labour Wakefield Irish father Jon Cruddas Labour Dagenham and Irish mother Rainham

Margaret Curran Labour Glasgow East Irish parentage Simon Danczuk Labour Rochdale Polish father Gloria De Piero Labour Ashfield Italian parentage

Pat Doherty Sinn Féin West Tyrone Irish parentage Nadine Dorries Conservative Mid Bedfordshire Irish father Jim Dowd Labour Lewisham West and German-born to Penge an Irish father & a German mother Jack Dromey Labour Birmingham, Erdington Irish parentage

Natascha Engel Labour North East Derbyshire German-born to a German father & a British mother Paul Farrelly Labour Newcastle-under-Lyme Irish father

Mark Field Conservative Cities of London and German-born to Westminster a British father & a German mother Paul Flynn Labour Newport West Irish father Mark Francois Conservative Rayleigh & Wickford Italian mother

254

Zac Goldsmith Conservative Richmond Park French-born father of German/French Jewish descent Helen Goodman Labour Bishop Auckland Danish mother

Dominic Grieve Conservative Beaconsfield French mother

Peter Hain Labour Neath Kenyan-born to South African parents Robert Halfon Conservative Harlow Libyan-born father of Italian Jewish descent Margaret Hodge Labour Barking Egyptian-born to German Jewish & Austrian Jewish parents Julian Huppert Liberal Democrat Cambridge Australian father

Mike Kane Labour Wythenshawe and Sale Irish parentage East

Sir Gerald Kaufman Labour Manchester, Gorton Polish Jewish parentage Daniel Kawczynski Conservative Shrewsbury and Polish-born Atcham Mark Lazarowicz Labour Edinburgh North and Polish parentage Leith Oliver Letwin Conservative West Dorset American (Ukrainian Jewish) parentage Denis MacShane Labour Rotherham Polish father & Irish mother Siobhain McDonagh Labour Mitcham and Morden Irish parentage Pat McFadden Labour Wolverhampton South Irish parentage East

Anne McIntosh Conservative Thirsk and Malton Danish mother David Miliband Labour South Shields Belgian-born father of Polish Jewish-origin & Polish Jewish mother

Ed Miliband Labour Doncaster North Belgian-born father of Polish

255

Jewish-origin & Polish Jewish mother Madeleine Moon Labour Bridgend Irish mother

Brooks Newmark Conservative Braintree American-born

Stephen Pound Labour Ealing North Irish-origin

Dominic Raab Conservative Esher and Walton Czech Jewish father Mark Reckless Conservative (2010- Rochester and Strood Irish mother 14) UKIP (2014-15) Angus Robertson Scottish National Moray German mother Party Chris Ruane Labour Vale of Clwyd Irish father David Rutley Conservative Macclesfield Danish mother Laura Sandys Conservative South Thanet French mother

Andrew Selous Conservative South West Australian Bedfordshire mother

Gisela Stuart Labour Birmingham, German-born Edgbaston

Mike Thornton Liberal Democrat Eastleigh American mother Ed Vaizey Conservative Wantage American mother

256

Table A1. 2. Black, Asian & Minority Ethnic (BAME) Immigrant-Origin MPs 59 MP Party Constituency Family Background Diane Abbott Labour Hackney North and Stoke Jamaican Newington parentage Adam Afriyie Conservative Windsor Ghanaian father Rushanara Ali Labour Bethnal Green & Bow Bangladeshi-born Rehman Chishti Conservative Gillingham & Rainham Pakistani-born Helen Grant Conservative Maidstone and The Weald Nigerian father

Sam Gyimah Conservative East Surrey Ghanaian parentage Mark Hendrick Labour Preston Somali father Sajid Javid Conservative Bromsgrove Pakistani parentage Sadiq Khan Labour Tooting Pakistani parentage Kwasi Kwarteng Conservative Spelthorne Ghanaian parentage David Lammy Labour Tottenham Guyanese parentage Khalid Mahmood Labour Birmingham, Perry Barr Pakistani-born

Shabana Mahmood Labour Birmingham, Ladywood Pakistani parentage Lisa Nandy Labour Wigan Indian father Chinyelu Onwurah Labour Newcastle upon Tyne Nigerian father Central

Priti Patel Conservative Witham Ugandan Asian (Indian-origin) parentage Yasmin Qureshi Labour Bolton South East Pakistani-born

Anas Sarwar Labour Glasgow Central Pakistani parentage Alok Sharma Conservative Reading West Indian-born Virendra Sharma Labour Ealing, Southall Indian-born

59 All BAME MPs who served during the 2010-15 Parliament qualified as immigrant-origin with the exception of Indian-origin Seema Malhotra (Lab, Feltham & Heston).

257

Marsha Singh Labour Bradford West Indian-born

Shailesh Vara Conservative North West Ugandan-born to Cambridgeshire Indian parents

Keith Vaz Labour Leicester East Yemeni-born to Indian parents Valerie Vaz Labour Walsall South Yemeni-born to Indian parents Chuka Umunna Labour Streatham Nigerian father Paul Uppal Conservative Wolverhampton South Kenyan Asian West (Indian-origin) parentage Nadhim Zahawi Conservative Stratford-on-Avon Iraqi-born to Iraqi Kurdish parents

258

Appendix II. Search Term Dictionaries 60

Table A2. 1. Search terms used to help identify questions relating to CVD angina diabetic smoker(s) aortic disease heart attack(s) smoking atheroma (coronary) heart disease stroke(s) atherosclerosis heart failure tobacco blood clot(s) heart valve disease transient isch(a)emic attack body mass index high blood pressure type 2 diabetes (including different variations: type-2, type ii, type two) cardiomyopathy hypertension cardiovascular disease obese (high) cholesterol obesity circulatory disease overweight coronary heart disease peripheral arterial disease CVD peripheral artery disease diabetes smoke

Table A2. 2. Search terms used to help identify questions relating to Mental Health anxiety mentally ill PTSD counselling personality disorder(s) schizophrenia depression post-traumatic stress schizophrenic disorder (with/without hyphen) mental disorder(s) psychiatric self-harm (with/without hyphen) mental health psychiatry suicidal mental illness psychological trauma suicide mental wellbeing psychosis well-being

60 An asterisk denotes that the search term has been truncated. As noted earlier, this streamlines the search process because fewer searches are necessary. For instance, a search for ‘xenophob’ returns results for both ‘xenophobic’ and ‘xenophobia’ within the database of parliamentary questions.

259

Table A2. 3. Search terms used to help identify questions relating to I.O. Prejudice anti-immigrant grounds of race/ethnicity race/racial discrimination anti-migrant harassment racial bigotry anti-semit* (with/without hate crime(s) racial harassment hyphen) BNP hatred racial intolerance British National Party immigrant racial prejudice caste discrimination Islamophob* racially motivated English Defence League Jew racis* extremis* Muslim religious discrimination far-right nazi xenophob* fascis* race

Table A2. 4. Search terms used to help identify questions relating to Other Prejudice anti-discrimination homophob* sectarianism bisexual intolerance sexis* disability discrimination lesbian transgender gay LGBT/lgbt transphob* grounds of disability pay discrimination transsexual hate crime(s) prejudice

260

Table A2. 5. Search terms used to help identify questions relating to I.O. Crime arrest* personal crime theft(s) of (motor) vehicle assault personal hate crime theft(s) of car burglar* personal offence unsolved kill* car crime personal theft unsolved murder convict* possession of a weapon vehicle theft firearm prison figures victim* guerrilla tactics prison numbers violence with(out) injury gun crime prison population violent crime gun death racially motivated (hate) ‘[…] have been shot’ crime gun murder racist assault ‘[…] were shot’ gun violence racist attack ‘anxiety(ies) about’ homicide racist violence ‘concern(s) about’ household crime religiously motivated hate ‘fear(s) about’ crime household theft report crime ‘report being a victim of crime’ infanticide reporting rate ‘worried about’ inmates robbery ‘worries about’ manslaughter theft ‘worry about’ mugging theft from the person murder theft(s) from the individual

Table A2. 6. Search terms used to help identify questions relating to CJS complaints against the police over-policed stop and search deaths in (police) custody police racism strip-search enforcement agents police raid suspicionless powers fishing trips police stereotyping suspicionless searches gypsy remanded in police custody traveller institutional racism remanded in prison custody treatment of prisoners joint enterprise spatial regulation under-protected macpherson report stephen lawrence

261

Table A2. 7. Search terms used to help identify questions relating to Unemployment access employment female employment looking for a job access the job market find employment looking for employment access the labour market find work looking for work access work gain employment out of work create jobs in work out-of-work economic inactivity job created self-employ* employment training job creation unemploy* enter the job market job seekers work experience enter the labour market job training work training enter employment labour force participation youth employment entered employment labour market participation

Table A2. 8. Search terms used to help identify questions relating to Employment full-time employment permanent employment full-time work permanent job part-time employment permanent work part-time work temporary employment

262

Appendix III. Supplementary Collocation Data

Table A3. 1. Supplementary data on collocates for cardiovascular disease (Native MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 respiratory 3 54 12.83 2 outcomes 16 758 11.44 3 newham 2 95 11.43 4 mortality 3 173 11.15 5 suffering 2 146 10.81 6 diagnosis 5 371 10.79 7 strategy 14 1,204 10.58 8 died 2 265 9.95 9 65 2 306 9.75 10 recorded 4 669 9.62 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 2

Table A3. 2. Supplementary data on collocates for cardiovascular disease (I.O. MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 outcomes 10 169 11.33 2 factors 3 51 11.32 3 strategy 9 274 10.48 4 implementing 4 123 10.47 5 groups 4 290 9.23 6 commissioning 3 230 9.15 7 high 3 297 8.78 8 risk 3 307 8.73 9 recent 4 2,391 6.18 10 as 3 1,993 6.03 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 3

Table A3. 3. Supplementary data on collocates for cardiovascular disease (White British MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 respiratory 3 54 12.83 2 outcomes 16 758 11.44 3 newham 2 95 11.43 4 mortality 3 173 11.15 5 suffering 2 146 10.81 6 diagnosis 5 371 10.79 7 strategy 14 1,204 10.58 8 died 2 264 9.96 9 65 2 306 9.74 10 recorded 4 667 9.62 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 2

263

Table A3. 4. Supplementary data on collocates for cardiovascular disease (I.O. White MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 protein 2 2 15.20 2 infectious 2 3 14.61 3 diets 2 3 14.61 4 outcomes 7 59 12.12 5 strategy 7 124 11.05 6 implementing 3 66 10.74 7 commissioning 3 84 10.39 8 groups 4 169 9.80 9 high 2 160 8.88 10 rates 2 196 8.58 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 2

Table A3. 5. Supplementary data on collocates for cardiovascular disease (BAME MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 dementia 1 4 13.76 2 fibrillation 1 8 12.76 3 factors 2 18 12.59 4 consumer 1 18 11.59 5 prevalence 1 28 10.95 6 outcomes 3 110 10.56 7 diagnosed 1 54 10.00 8 guidelines 1 58 9.90 9 implementing 1 59 9.87 10 recommendations 1 61 9.82 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 1

Table A3. 6. Supplementary data on collocates for mental health (Native MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 adolescent 59 78 12.01 2 stigma 16 27 11.65 3 1983 49 84 11.63 4 perinatal 21 43 11.37 5 problems 125 370 10.84 6 disorders 27 125 10.20 7 beds 19 141 9.52 8 well-being 14 110 9.43 9 suffering 13 146 8.92 10 detained 17 213 8.76 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count - 10

264

Table A3. 7. Supplementary data on collocates for mental health (I.O. MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 adolescent 10 10 12.31 2 disorders 12 31 10.94 3 1983 7 19 10.87 4 problems 20 63 10.65 5 difficulties 5 30 9.72 6 veterans 6 37 9.68 7 condition 8 52 9.61 8 diagnosed 11 128 8.77 9 well-being 8 109 8.54 10 conditions 16 232 8.45 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count - 5

Table A3. 8. Supplementary data on collocates for mental health (White British MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 adolescent 59 78 12.07 2 Stigma 16 27 11.66 3 1983 49 84 11.63 4 perinatal 21 43 11.38 5 problems 125 370 10.85 6 disorders 27 125 10.20 7 beds 19 141 9.52 8 well-being 14 110 9.44 9 suffering 13 146 8.92 10 detained 17 211 8.78 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 10

Table A3. 9. Supplementary data on collocates for mental health (I.O. White MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 adolescent 6 6 12.42 2 disorders 7 23 10.71 3 problems 12 46 10.49 4 condition 7 32 10.23 5 veterans 5 30 9.84 6 conditions 11 109 9.12 7 physical 5 60 8.84 8 Diagnosed 5 77 8.48 9 issues 5 93 8.21 10 well-being 5 174 8.06 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 5

265

Table A3. 10. Supplementary data on collocates for mental health (BAME MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 1983 5 5 12.17 2 disorders 5 8 11.49 3 problems 8 17 11.08 4 difficulties 5 14 10.69 5 diagnosed 6 54 9.00 6 issues 7 116 8.12 7 strategy 7 150 7.75 8 services 28 661 7.61 9 conditions 5 123 7.55 10 treatment 6 167 7.37 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 5

Table A3. 11. Supplementary data on collocates for discrim* (Native MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 transphobic 19 25 13.36 2 stigma 18 27 13.17 3 racial 27 41 13.15 4 caste 19 29 13.14 5 lodged 95 187 12.78 6 homophobic 19 38 12.75 7 elimination 11 29 12.36 8 harassment 98 332 11.99 9 signing 16 71 11.61 10 pregnancy 38 219 11.23 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count - 10

Table A3. 12. Supplementary data on collocates for discrim* (I.O. MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 racial 2 4 14.57 2 elimination 2 5 14.25 3 muslims 3 19 12.91 4 forms 3 83 10.78 5 against 9 456 10.32 6 reports 2 342 8.15 7 cases 3 544 8.07 8 all 3 670 7.77 9 women 2 457 7.74 10 taking 3 1,447 6.66 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count - 2

266

Table A3. 13. Supplementary data on collocates for discrim* (White British MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 transphobic 19 25 13.47 2 stigma 18 27 13.29 3 racial 27 41 13.27 4 caste 19 29 13.26 5 homophobic 19 37 12.91 6 lodged 95 187 12.89 7 elimination 10 28 12.38 8 harassment 98 332 12.11 9 signing 16 71 11.72 10 pregnancy 38 219 11.34 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 10

Table A3. 14. Supplementary data on collocates for discrim* (I.O. White MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 impartially 1 1 15.78 2 eweida 1 1 15.78 3 left-handedness 1 1 15.78 4 racial 1 2 14.78 5 ahmadiyya 1 2 14.78 6 nadia 1 2 14.78 7 same-sex 1 3 14.20 8 elimination 1 3 14.20 9 ethos 1 3 14.20 10 pursued 1 4 13.78 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 1

Table A3. 15. Supplementary data on collocates for discrim* (BAME MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 1979 1 1 15.27 2 elimination 2 3 14.69 3 racial 1 2 14.27 4 stigma 1 3 13.69 5 persecution 1 3 13.69 6 gay 1 5 12.95 7 lesbian 1 5 12.95 8 muslims 2 13 12.57 9 defending 1 7 12.46 10 abuses 1 7 12.46 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 1

267

Table A3. 16. Supplementary data on collocates for crime (Native MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 humanity 36 30 12.00 2 hate 46 54 11.50 3 organised 129 228 10.91 4 proceeds 50 104 10.68 5 scene 9 19 10.66 6 gun 9 27 10.15 7 knife 41 124 10.14 8 wildlife 74 224 10.14 9 violent 46 144 10.09 10 drug-related 14 44 10.08 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 9

Table A3. 17. Supplementary data on collocates for crime (I.O. MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 humanity 8 5 12.33 2 proceeds 13 16 11.35 3 hate 21 26 11.34 4 gun 7 11 11.00 5 organised 20 47 10.42 6 war 16 39 10.36 7 wildlife 10 26 10.27 8 homophobic 5 16 9.97 9 serious 23 91 9.66 10 commissioners 21 93 9.50 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 5

Table A3. 18. Supplementary data on collocates for crime (White British MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 humanity 36 30 12.00 2 hate 46 54 11.50 3 organised 129 228 10.91 4 proceeds 50 104 10.68 5 scene 9 19 10.66 6 gun 9 27 10.15 7 knife 41 124 10.14 8 wildlife 74 224 10.14 9 violent 46 143 10.10 10 drug-related 14 44 10.08 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 9

268

Table A3. 19. Supplementary data on collocates for crime (I.O. White MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 proceeds 11 13 11.626 2 war 10 25 10.545 3 organised 12 32 10.452 4 serious 14 44 10.215 5 committed 12 50 9.808 6 victims 10 71 9.039 7 against 15 232 7.916 8 agency 19 487 7.187 9 police 16 432 7.112 10 act 12 377 6.894 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 10

Table A3. 20. Supplementary data on collocates for crime (BAME MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 hate 15 15 11.433 2 gun 7 11 10.781 3 organised 8 15 10.526 4 commissioners 18 42 10.211 5 war 6 14 10.211 6 percentage 5 17 9.668 7 victims 33 140 9.348 8 serious 11 49 9.278 9 cyber 8 42 9.041 10 committed 14 99 8.611 Minimum candidate count – 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 5

Table A3. 21. Supplementary data on collocates for justice system (Native MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 protects 2 3 15.04 2 treats 2 9 13.46 3 modernise 2 11 13.17 4 serbian 2 12 13.04 5 translators 3 28 12.40 6 criminal 88 1,106 11.98 7 listening 2 39 11.34 8 addressing 2 56 10.82 9 operates 2 59 10.74 10 confidence 2 68 10.54 Minimum candidate count - 1; Minimum co-occurrence count - 2

269

Table A3. 22. Supplementary data on collocates for justice system (I.O. MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 lucian 2 2 15.46 2 entered 5 66 11.74 3 criminal 19 312 11.42 4 referral 2 37 11.25 5 youth 5 124 10.83 6 language 2 92 9.94 7 left 2 113 9.64 8 first 2 317 8.15 9 cases 2 544 7.37 10 time 2 773 6.87 Minimum candidate count - 1; Minimum co-occurrence count - 2

Table A3. 23. Supplementary data on collocates for justice system (White British MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 protects 2 3 15.04 2 treats 2 9 13.46 3 modernise 2 11 13.17 4 serbian 2 12 13.04 5 translators 3 28 12.40 6 criminal 88 1,102 11.98 7 listening 2 39 11.34 8 addressing 2 56 10.82 9 operates 2 59 10.74 10 confidence 2 68 10.54 Minimum candidate count - 1; Minimum co-occurrence count - 2

Table A3. 24. Supplementary data on collocates for justice system (I.O. White MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 fantasising 1 2 15.56 2 interpreting 1 5 14.24 3 better 1 19 12.31 4 users 1 22 12.10 5 criminal 4 122 11.63 6 prisons 1 40 11.24 7 protect 1 47 11.01 8 comparative 1 52 10.86 9 therapies 1 64 10.56 10 facilities 1 89 10.08 Minimum candidate count - 1; Minimum co-occurrence count - 1

270

Table A3. 25. Supplementary data on collocates for justice system (BAME MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 lucian 2 2 14.74 2 entered 5 38 11.81 3 referral 2 17 11.65 4 criminal 15 194 11.04 5 youth 5 93 10.52 6 language 2 64 9.74 7 left 2 68 9.65 8 first 2 141 8.60 9 time 2 445 6.94 10 3 2 518 6.72 Minimum candidate count - 1; Minimum co-occurrence count - 2

Table A3. 26. Supplementary data on collocates for unemploy* (Native MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 inactivity 10 20 12.02 2 classed 55 163 11.45 3 youth 96 725 10.10 4 long-term 58 560 9.75 5 graduate 10 138 9.23 6 among 19 405 8.60 7 prisoners 51 1,118 8.56 8 tackle 19 642 7.94 9 trends 10 387 7.74 10 24 21 907 7.59 Minimum candidate count - 1; Minimum co-occurrence count - 10

Table A3. 27. Supplementary data on collocates for unemploy* (I.O. MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 classed 18 41 11.67 2 long-term 17 174 9.50 3 youth 12 124 9.49 4 amongst 4 43 9.43 5 job 4 87 8.41 6 teachers 4 91 8.35 7 persons 5 136 8.09 8 trends 4 134 7.79 9 levels 16 544 7.77 10 young 11 389 7.71 Minimum candidate count - 1; Minimum co-occurrence count - 4

271

Table A3. 28. Supplementary data on collocates for unemploy* (White British MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 inactivity 10 20 12.02 2 classed 55 163 11.45 3 youth 95 724 10.09 4 long-term 57 559 9.72 5 graduates 10 138 9.23 6 among 19 405 8.60 7 prisoners 51 1,118 8.56 8 tackle 19 642 7.94 9 trends 10 387 7.74 10 24 21 907 7.59 Minimum candidate count - 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 10

Table A3. 29. Supplementary data on collocates for unemploy* (I.O. White MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 classed 8 26 10.75 2 youth 5 32 9.77 3 long-term 16 132 9.40 4 persons 5 52 9.07 5 prisoners 5 83 8.40 6 young 8 187 7.90 7 people 33 1,304 7.14 8 levels 10 423 7.05 9 rate 6 276 6.92 10 over 5 273 6.68 Minimum candidate count - 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 5

Table A3. 30. Supplementary data on collocates for unemploy* (BAME MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 classed 10 15 13.03 2 levels 6 124 9.25 3 ladywood 3 82 8.85 4 youth 8 242 8.70 5 prisoners 12 512 8.20 6 pay 4 174 8.18 7 birmingham 3 150 7.97 8 date 10 729 7.43 9 latest 5 390 7.33 10 as 10 866 7.18 Minimum candidate count - 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 3

272

Table A3. 31. Supplementary data on collocates for employ* (Native MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 non-permanent 40 29 9.61 2 cryptography 3 3 9.15 3 dss 3 3 9.15 4 desking 17 17 9.15 5 tinto 10 11 9.01 6 system’s 22 25 8.96 7 speechwriters 19 22 8.93 8 non-english 16 19 8.90 9 subcontracted 16 21 8.75 10 dues 18 24 8.73 Minimum candidate count - 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 3

Table A3. 32. Supplementary data on collocates for employ* (I.O. MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 headquarter 19 21 9.06 2 centralised 17 19 9.05 3 fixed-term 20 24 8.94 4 specify 41 50 8.92 5 indirectly 18 22 8.92 6 according 21 27 8.84 7 hourly 23 30 8.82 8 shareholder 8 11 8.75 9 drafting 20 29 8.67 10 apprentices 100 148 8.64 Minimum candidate count - 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 4

Table A3. 33. Supplementary data on collocates for employ* (White British MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 non-permanent 40 29 9.61 2 cryptography 3 3 9.14 3 dss 3 3 9.14 4 desking 17 17 9.14 5 tinto 10 11 9.01 6 system’s 22 25 8.96 7 speechwriters 19 22 8.93 8 non-english 16 19 8.90 9 subcontracted 16 21 8.75 10 remissions 3 4 8.73 Minimum candidate count - 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 3

273

Table A3. 34. Supplementary data on collocates for employ* (I.O. White MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 indirectly 18 14 9.76 2 centralised 17 18 9.32 3 headquarter 19 21 9.26 4 drafting 20 24 9.14 5 zero-hours 9 11 9.11 6 hourly 23 30 9.02 7 volunteer 24 34 8.90 8 principles 36 54 8.82 9 good 36 65 8.55 10 apprentices 25 50 8.40 Minimum candidate count - 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 4

Table A3. 35. Supplementary data on collocates for employ* (BAME MPs) Rank Collocate Co-occurrence Candidate count Mutual count Information (MI) score 1 main 86 67 9.37 2 according 21 24 8.82 3 specify 41 47 8.81 4 owner 6 7 8.79 5 fixed-term 17 20 8.77 6 shareholder 8 10 8.69 7 apprentices 75 98 8.62 8 contributory 4 6 8.42 9 represent 21 33 8.36 10 grades 20 36 8.16 Minimum candidate count - 1; Minimum co-occurrence count – 4

274