HOUSE OF LORDS Information Committee 1st Report of Session 2008–09 Are the Lords listening? Creating connections between people and Parliament Volume II: Evidence Ordered to be printed 8 July 2009 and published 15 July 2009 Published by the Authority of the House of Lords London : The Stationery Office Limited £price HL Paper 138-II CONTENTS Page Oral Evidence Dr Ruth Fox, Dr Andy Williamson and Mr Michael Raftery, Hansard Society Oral evidence, 18 March 2009 1 Supplementary written evidence 10 Mr Sam Ellis and Ms Petergaye Palmer, UK Youth Parliament Oral evidence, 18 March 2009 16 Mr David Bowen, Bowen Craggs; Mr Ivor Gormley; Mr Ben Hammersley, Wired UK; Mr Tim Hood, Yoosk; and Mr Tom Loosemore, Channel 4 Oral evidence, 1 April 2009 23 Supplementary written evidence, Mr Tim Hood 33 Ms Trish McMeekin, Ms Alison Williams, Rethink; Mr Lee Shelsher, Essex Library Service, Essex County Council; and Ms Chloe Stables, NCVO Oral evidence, 29 April 2009 37 Mr George Ritchie, Ms Lynsey Davidson, Mr Danyal Khan, Mr Liam Sanders and Mr Michael MacDonald, Bede Sixth Form, Stockton-on-Tees Oral evidence, 29 April 2009 44 Ms Jaimini Patel, Ms Akua Yeboah, Ms Samira Ahmed, Ms Laurette Kitoko and Ms Parminder Rathore, Skinners’ Company’s School for Girls, London Oral evidence, 29 April 2009 47 Mr Jake Ross, Mr Haysam Agabani, Mr Mahmoud Hassan, Mr Majid Aljassas and Ms Dina Chouwdhury, Quintin Kynaston School, London Oral evidence, 29 April 2009 50 Mr David Hencke, The Guardian; Mr Jason Beattie, The Mirror; Mr John Hipwood, Wolverhampton Express and Star; and Mr Peter Riddell, The Times Oral evidence, 6 May 2009 54 Lord Norton of Louth Written evidence 64 Oral evidence, 6 May 2009 66 Mr Tom Watson MP and Mr Andrew Stott, Cabinet Office Oral evidence, 20 May 2009 74 Mr Peter Knowles, BBC; Mr Peter Lowe, Sky News; Mr Toby Castle, ITV News; and Mr Simon Mares ITV Regions Written evidence by the BBC 83 Written evidence by Sky News 85 Written evidence by ITN 86 Written evidence by ITV Regions 89 Oral evidence, 3 June 2009 90 Written Evidence Lord Avebury 100 Bevan Brittan LLP 100 Lord Cameron of Dillington 102 Channel 4 103 Comment Technologies 105 Community Service Volunteers 106 Debategraph 107 Debatewise 109 Andrew Dismore MP 113 Lord Elton 114 Fawcett Society 114 Lord Feldman 116 Five News 116 Group on Information for the Public 117 House of Lords Outreach and Engagement Programme 134 Lord Howe of Aberavon 135 Lord Hunt of Chesterton 136 Involve 136 Dr Nigel Jackson 138 Lord Leach of Fairford 141 Lord Lipsey 141 Simon McManus 142 National Federation of Women’s Institutes (NFWI) 144 Professor Ralph Negrine 144 Novas Scarman 147 Optimum Communications Development Ltd 155 Parliamentary Information and Communications Department (PICT) 155 Rufus Leonard 157 Dr Meg Russell 160 Baroness Thomas of Winchester 163 Lord Vinson 163 NOTE: The Report of the Committee is published in Volume I (HL Paper No. 138-I) The Evidence of the Committee is published in Volume II (HL Paper No. 138-II) Processed: 10-07-2009 19:29:21 Page Layout: LOENEW[ex 1] PPSysB Job: 430699 Unit: PAG1 Minutes of Evidence TAKEN BEFORE THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INFORMATION WEDNESDAY 18 MARCH 2009 Present Billingham, B Methuen, L Erroll, E Renton of Mount Harry, L (Chairman) Gibson of Market Rasen, B Selsdon, L Jones of Cheltenham, L St John of Bletso, L Kalms, L Taylor of Warwick, L Examination of Witnesses Witnesses: Dr Ruth Fox, Director of the Parliament and Government Programme, Dr Andy Williamson, Director of the eDemocracy Programme, and Mr Michael Raftery, Director of the Citizenship Programme, Hansard Society, examined. Q1 Chairman: Welcome to all three of you and thank who is Director of the Citizenship Programme, and you very much for coming to this meeting of our myself, Director of the Parliament and Government Information Committee. As you know, we have set Programme. Just to confirm that we do plan to ourselves an inquiry on the subject of People and submit written evidence to the inquiry so that we can Parliament and we are very grateful that you have follow up on any other issues which are not covered come as our first witnesses, and it is absolutely today. We would just like to say very briefly that we appropriate that you should given that it was your welcome the inquiry and an opportunity to update on Commission, which Lord Puttnam chaired, which in the progress since the Puttnam report and the a sense started some of this debate. I have particular Modernisation Committee’s Report. We applaud regrets from Lord Puttnam today that he could not be Parliament for a lot of progress which has been made here. He is actually, I think, judging up in Scotland on in the year since the Puttnam Commission, but we which is the best museum in Britain. That is the think there is still room for further progress and we impression I got from him on the telephone this will discuss the areas today, but we certainly urge morning. He sends his apologies and his last message Members to grasp the nettle and not rest on their to me was to “keep the smoke going up”. I would just laurels in terms of progress and do not take our like to say to you that this is a public evidence session. positive comments today as a reason to sit back. We There will be a full transcript of it and it will be posted urge you, as Lord Puttnam said, to keep the grey on the website and published in our Committee’s smoke going! Very recently we published some eventual report, but a draft will be sent to you shortly research in a document called Parliament and the for you to look at so that if you feel anything has been Public Knowledge, Interest and Perceptions and that misquoted or misrepresented you will have an really confirmed that in the five years since the opportunity to change it. Dr Fox, would you like to Puttnam inquiry there has not been a lot of progress make any statement before we start? You are very in terms of how the public sees Parliament. There are welcome to do so if you would like to, or either of still 32 per cent of people who agree that they have a your colleagues? Perhaps you would like to introduce good understanding of the way Parliament works. yourselves. That is only 32 per cent. Only 19 per cent of people Dr Fox: Yes, thank you very much. I have a very agree that Parliament is working for them. Those short statement really just to explain who the three of sorts of figures indicate that there is still a huge us are. I am sure all of you know that in terms of the challenge to grapple with as we go forward. Hansard Society we are an education and research charity and we have several programmes of work. All three areas which the Committee wanted to look at Q2 Chairman: Thank you. We will go on then to the cut across some of our programmes of work, so we questions and I know that you have been sent these thought it would be more helpful for all three of us to in advance for you to have a look at. We may stray be here as directors of our respective programmes from them, we may not, but we will start with them. than just myself. If I could introduce my colleagues, We know the sorts of information, obviously, we are Dr Andrew Williamson to my left, who is the looking to have but this can be enlarged, et cetera. Dr Director of the eDemocracy Programme at the Fox, you have just said that you did not think all that Hansard Society, and to my right Michael Raftery, amount of progress had been made since the Puttnam Processed: 10-07-2009 19:29:21 Page Layout: LOENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 430699 Unit: PAG1 2 people and parliament: evidence 18 March 2009 Dr Ruth Fox, Dr Andy Williamson and Mr Michael Raftery report. What is lacking? What has not happened that repository of information which the public can access might have happened? on its own terms in its own way. The way the internet Dr Fox: Just for clarity, I think there has been a is developing at the moment is much less about a considerable amount of progress but I think there are central website which makes information available in some areas where more progress is needed. On the a format that you choose and much more about communications, whilst there is a communications making available the data as an open standard that strategy and there is, in eVect, a media oYce and other people can then choose to reproduce and staYng for both Houses, and whilst there is access. I think that would be a big step forward. I cooperation between the Houses and between the would caveat that by saying the progress you have staV and there is the bicameral membership of the made in terms of the use of the internet for Group for Information on the Public, we are still Parliament is significant, in fact I think it is probably concerned that one of the recommendations of the the greatest success area in terms of what has Puttnam Commission in terms of a joint committee happened since Puttnam. There has been significant to deal with communications has not been followed progress there. Secondly,I think it is about the reverse through.