Amongst the many absurdities within the UK parliamentary system that some claim represents a democracy is the absurd fact that MPs do not actually have a seat in parliament.
Not all 650 MPs can assemble there and sit at the same time, and the absence of Sinn Fein makes no difference to that fact.
This will be exacerbated over the next five years. The number of seats on the Government benches is the same as on the Opposition side. However, there are 411 Government MPs and only around 230 Opposition members seeking a place.
The result is that Labour will never be able to sit all its MPs in parliament at once as they are being told they must never sit on the Opposition benches.
And we call this a working democracy?
Who are those claiming that to be the case kidding?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
The House of Commons was bombed in the war and when it was rebuilt, I read, it was Churchill said there should be too few seats so when there was a vital debate, there would be some MPs standing to create a sense of drama.
The House needs refurbishment and this might be an opportunity to relocate to somewhere else in London and have a semi-circular seating arrangement with a seat for everyone and a modern system of voting. They could then decide what to do in the future.
The Fabian Society published a pamphlet at least 20 years ago, maybe more, in which the author suggested remodelling the Commons into a semi-circular arrangement, within the confines of the current Chamber.
I’ll see if I can find the reference, so as to give the author’s name.
Of course, we might also set up our own “Washington DC”, somewhere close to the centre of the British Isles, as part of a dismantling of the pernicious “Westminster bubble”, product of, as well as producer of, the most centralised polity almost anywhere in the world, but certainly in Western Europe.
Haltwhistle!
I have believed for many years that we need to build a new home for Parliament. Preferably out of London, with enough office space for MPs and their teams, and definitely with horseshoe debating chambers fit for a 21st century democracy. It will happen one day, and the sooner the better!
It’s high time the UK gave up on its nineteenth century legacy, in so many ways!
And with adjacent blocks of bedsits for MPs to sleep in when the sitting goes on too late for transport home.
They won’t need second homes then, will they?
The problem is that they need homes in London. I thinks second homes are necessary, and even essential.
Move the legislature out of London to a purpose-built site close to the geographical centre of GB. The existing Palace of Westminster could be repurposed as a magnificent Museum of Democracy at much lower cost than that of the proposed massively expensive and in any case disruptive refurbishment. Have electronic voting instead of the current ridiculous inefficient system of trooping into lobbies. Horseshoe-shaped chambers are more flexible and less confrontational. And (pace Edinburgh) we would have the benefit of separating the legislative capital of the country from its financial capital.
Agreed.
Turn it into a hotel and it will be a hit with the Americans.
There are some practical problems with leaving London.
The ministries are in London and Ministers have to be present in the Ministry and appear in Parliament. They are only a few miles apart.
The embassies and High Commissions are in London as is the Financial sector, Downing Street and the Palace ( the King still having a minor role)
Many companies are headquartered there.
Modern communications can mitigate this to a large extent but real personal contact, as in medicine, is important.
I agree with the other points.
I suggest we build on Horse Guards Parade
That’s an excellent idea. Let’s abolish the HoL at the same time.
Problem is no-one can agree on what is the centre of the UK.
There are claims from Haltwhistle, Dunsop Bridge in Bowland , and near Whalley, Lancs.
Haltwhistle would definitely need the Newcastle to Carlisle line and A69 further upgrading; Dunsop Bridge is owned by the aristocratic Towneley family; and Whalley is in a flood risk area.
Each would illuminate a different set of UK priorities, and focus the minds of the legislators differently …including rural affordable housing, land tenure, climate change, moorland management and a new northern powerhouse with half decent infrastructure.
The UK population centre has been calculated as Appleby Parva, Leics. just off the M42, but that is poor for rail links.
I think it would be incredibly difficult to move parliament out of London
The logistics just would not work
Geographical centre weighted by population, I suggest or I think the new parliament would be in Scotland !!
I found it. It’s called “Reinventing Democracy: Labour’s mission for the new century”, written by Graham Allen MP, and published in January 1995, and undoubtedly written while the Labour Party WAS STILL a Labour Party, and still led by a genuine Socialist, John Smith.
As for what happened thereafter, nuff said!!
I must reread the pamphlet, as it is clearly worth reading.
On a semi-circlular Chamber he has the following on page 27:
“Electronic voting would make the current voting lobbies redundant and we could use the extra space to build a modern semi-circular chamber.”
A video is coming on this…
Richard, you say moving Parliament out of London is impractical. I’m sure the same was said after WW2 about Berlin but Bonn worked fine and encouraged a modernised less Prussian Government. The impetus to move was obviously extremely clear and a clean break was inevitable (despite the relocation of many National Socialists to NATO appointments). The same is actually true of the UK except that it is well camouflaged in nonsensical nostalgia for a non-existent past.
I used to be astounded by the shutting down of failing schools rather than reforming them. However, the argument went that the buildings embodying the failing culture and ethos lived on in local memory and had to go. The UK will never change if London continues to have all of the main financial, political, cultural and social elites co-existing in a privileged enclave. Centralisation is self-perpetuating and has to be challenged and broken down. Parliament is a good place to start to establish actual democracy in a a radically devolved UK.
Hang on, the move to Bonn was a bit different, I think
Of course, but we are at a significant break point in the history of our so-called democracy where the very edifice that serves to accommodate, signify and broadcast our claims to be a democratic state demonstrably and ridiculously fail to live up to contemporary demands – the duopoly having been shattered, the building fabric failing disastrously, the archaic ancient rituals being kept alive despite the digital age that can enable a far more equal and inclusive work process as partly seen during Covid lockdowns, the most visibly unrepresentative outcome of the recent election whose minority leader’s first major act on our behalf is to authorise the Ukraine to use British weapons to attack inside the Russian Federation making Britain a legitimate party in the war and Russia now has the right to strike the UK directly. Parliament itself has been utterly discredited and urgently needs to be comprehensively changed.
I think a lot of caveats are required on your claim – and I am watching football