How is the Petitions Committee representing the public amid the procedural and practical restrictions of the Covid crisis?
Thu. 27 Aug 2020
Catherine McKinnell MP, Chair of the House of Commons Petitions Committee, sets out how the Covid-19 crisis has significantly increased the public's use of e-petitions while limiting the House's ability to debate them. This has prompted the Committee to innovate, to ensure that petitioners' voices are heard during the crisis.
, House of Commons
Catherine McKinnell MP
Catherine McKinnell MP
Chair, Petitions Committee, House of Commons
Get our latest research, insights and events delivered to your inbox
Share this and support our work
The UK Parliament petitions system is the most popular parliamentary initiative of its kind in the world. In these times of national crisis, the role of the Petitions Committee is more important than ever.
The Petitions Committee was first established in 2015. I became a member of it in 2016 and was elected its second-ever Chair earlier this year. During this time, we have held the Government to account on behalf of petitioners, including on the issues of protecting the public online, securing much-needed brain tumour research funding, and improving guidance for employers on the 2010 Equality Act.
The Hansard Society's 2019 Audit of Political Engagement highlighted that petitioning is the most popular form of democratic action after voting in elections and contacting elected representatives. This highlights the immense responsibility that comes with chairing this Committee. Over 25 million people have started or signed petitions over the last five years, and we take our responsibility to give a voice to those fighting to be heard incredibly seriously. The current situation makes our ability to hold the Government to account on behalf of petitioners ever more crucial.
Since the start of the Coronavirus crisis, our Committee has seen over 5.6 million signatures on petitions relating to the pandemic. We would usually expect to see around 400 new petitions on our website each week – but as the country went into lockdown, we were seeing many times more being started, peaking at over 7,000 petitions being started in March alone.
In normal times, parliamentary e-petitions that receive over 100,000 signatures are automatically considered for debate in Westminster Hall. These debates are frequently the most popular piece of parliamentary business for the public to watch or read online. Unfortunately, Westminster Hall has not been available for debates since March due to social distancing, and the Government has been slow to enable it to reopen. As Parliament returns from the summer recess, it is hoped that debates will resume in Westminster Hall in the autumn. These debates are an essential part of our toolkit and allow us to directly question a Government Minister in person every week and hold their feet to the fire.
As we have been unable to schedule petitions debates, we have seen a large backlog of petitions – with hundreds of thousands of signatures – eligible for debate quickly build up. Although our Committee was granted time in the House of Commons Chamber for the first time ever on 25 June, we have otherwise had to be creative to ensure, with extremely limited opportunities to debate, that petitioners' concerns are heard.
We have taken innovative approaches to scrutinising the Government, including:
virtual evidence sessions;
extensive correspondence; and
online engagement sessions with petitioners, including a discussion with the nature broadcaster and campaigner Chris Packham on grouse shooting, and a conversation with pet theft campaigners on their proposals for a new law.
We have also launched two inquiries, the first into the Government's response to Coronavirus and the second into Tackling Online Abuse.
As the lockdown approached, it became very clear that the petitioning public were not only hugely concerned by what was happening but also confused, with many unanswered questions. We felt it was vital to engage extensively with petitioners and the wider public to help us understand the impact the crisis was having on people's lives.
We surveyed over one million people who had signed petitions about Covid-19 to find out what questions they wanted us to ask the Government. More than 60,000 responses were analysed and a series of questions reflecting the main issues dominating petitioners' concerns were drawn out. As the House had yet to approve the holding of formal committee meetings fully- or partly-remotely, we put these questions in an informal online evidence session with the Deputy Chief Medical Officer and Government Ministers from the Department of Education and the Department for Work and Pensions. We put the unanswered questions to other Government departments in writing, to ensure concerns weren't ignored.
We dedicated our 'hybrid' public Committee meetings to looking at areas that were not being widely examined in other ways by Parliament. Last month, we published two reports as part of our inquiry into the Government's Coronavirus response.
The first report calls on the Government to extend parental leave and pay for new parents in light of Covid-19, after more than 226,000 people signed an e-petition on this issue. We saw unprecedented levels of online engagement from petitioners, with 69,000 responses to our surveys and social media posts. Through this online engagement and several formal evidence sessions, we heard from parents who felt like they are anomalies, whose circumstances have been missed by the Government during the crisis, who felt their jobs were at risk as they were unable to find childcare, who were concerned for their child’s development, and whose own mental health had suffered.
Our report recommends that the Government urgently review how new parents are supported during the crisis. However, we are still waiting for a response. It is extremely disappointing that the Government did not recognise the urgency of this issue by responding to our report before the summer recess – particularly as the Prime Minister recently made a personal commitment to review our report. I will continue to stress the urgency of this issue to the Government on behalf of petitioners.
We also published a report calling for the Government to increase support for universities and students amid huge Coronavirus disruption. Students told us they have not received the standard of education they had expected or felt entitled to, considering the amount they are paying in tuition fees. We heard that students, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds, had found it difficult to access online content and facilities.
It is clear that students and universities will continue to face significant challenges ahead, particularly as we begin to understand the real impact on the sector of changes to the way in which A-Level results are calculated. Earlier this month, I wrote to the Secretary of State for Education to ask the Government to expedite its response to petitions on this subject due to the looming deadline for university offer conditions to be met.
In July we used our final 'hybrid' session before recess to put to the Government the many concerns raised in petitions about the easing of lockdown restrictions. Knowing that other MPs were being flooded with concerns from their constituents and would want to contribute, we opened the session up so that any interested MPs could attend and put their points to the Government. We prioritised those Members who were shielding and had been excluded from participating in substantive business in the House of Commons Chamber since hybrid proceedings were stopped for the main Chamber after Easter.
The Petitions Committee has a strong track record of raising issues that might otherwise struggle to get the parliamentary attention they deserve. We have been working hard throughout this pandemic to ensure that petitioners and the public have a powerful platform to put their concerns to the Government.
As Parliament nears its return from summer recess, the Petitions Committee remains determined to question the Government, press for answers, and work with other select committees to ensure we represent the best interests of petitioners across the country.
Banner image: Catherine McKinnell MP in the first Petitions Committee debate in the House of Commons Chamber, 25 June 2020 © UK Parliament/Jess Taylor
More
Related
Blog / Back to the future? House of Commons scrutiny of EU affairs after Lord Frost's exit
The recent rearrangement of responsibilities for the government’s handling of EU-related affairs raises questions about future parliamentary scrutiny of these issues. In some respects pre-2016 institutional arrangements are restored, but the post-Brexit landscape presents new scrutiny challenges which thus far MPs have not confronted.
Blog / "Will they come when you do call for them?": Should select committees have real power to compel evidence?
In a recent report the House of Commons Privileges Committee recommended the creation of a new criminal offence to deal with the rare problem of recalcitrant select committee witnesses. The proposal is narrow and looks workable. However, it remains controversial, and the Committee has invited further views, with final proposals expected later in 2021.
Guides / Financial Scrutiny: the Budget
In order to raise income, the government needs to obtain approval from Parliament for its taxation plans. The Budget process is the means by which the House of Commons considers the government’s plans to impose 'charges on the people' and its assessment of the wider state of the economy.
Blog / Lord Frost appointment raises parliamentary scrutiny questions
Lord Frost's appointment as Minister of State in the Cabinet Office to lead on UK-EU relations brings some welcome clarity about future government arrangements in this area. However, it also raises challenges for parliamentary scrutiny, above all with respect to his status as a Member of the House of Lords.
Briefings / Who chooses the scrutineer? Why MPs should resist the government's attempt to determine the Liaison Committee chair
Should the Liaison Committee have as its chair someone who is not simultaneously a select committee chair, and should the identity of that person be determined by the government? The answer to these questions will tell us much about how this cohort of MPs, particularly government backbenchers, view the relationship between Parliament and the executive.
Blog / 2019 Mock Elections: Higher turnout and different outcome than the real general election
Schools making up an ‘electorate’ of over 46,000 young people returned their results to the Hansard Society's 2019 Mock Elections, which were held to coincide with the December general election and continued a series extending back over 50 years. Labour emerged as the clear 'winner' of the 2019 mock poll.
Blog / The 2019 Liaison Committee report on the Commons select committee system: broadening the church, integrating with the Chamber
In its recent landmark report, the House of Commons Liaison Committee recommended a widening of the circle of those that select committees should hold to account, and a turn towards the public in all committee activity, but also tighter links between select committees and the House of Commons Chamber.
Blog / The DCMS Committee, Facebook and parliamentary powers and privilege
For its 'fake news' inquiry the House of Commons DCMS Committee has reportedly acquired papers related to a US court case involving Facebook. Andrew Kennon, former Commons Clerk of Committees, says the incident shows how the House's powers to obtain evidence do work, but that it might also weaken the case for Parliament's necessary powers in the long term.
Events / Future Parliament: Hacking the Legislative Process // Capacity, Scrutiny, Engagement
From finance to healthcare, technology has transformed the way we live, work and play, with innovative solutions to some of the world’s biggest challenges. Can it also have a role in how we make our laws?
Blog / Corbyn's 'Save Our Steel' e-petition shows why the rules governing the recall of Parliament need to change
In a time of crisis Parliament is hamstrung if it is in recess. MPs are not masters of their own House because, in accordance with House of Commons Standing Order 13, only government ministers - in reality the Prime Minister - can request a recall of Parliament.
Latest
Guides / Financial Scrutiny: the Budget
In order to raise income, the government needs to obtain approval from Parliament for its taxation plans. The Budget process is the means by which the House of Commons considers the government’s plans to impose 'charges on the people' and its assessment of the wider state of the economy.
Guides / Financial Scrutiny: the Estimates Cycle
In order to incur expenditure the government needs to obtain approval from Parliament for its departmental spending plans. The annual Estimates cycle is the means by which the House of Commons controls the government’s plans for the spending of money raised through taxation.
Data / Coronavirus Statutory Instruments Dashboard
The national effort to tackle the Coronavirus health emergency has resulted in UK ministers being granted some of the broadest legislative powers ever seen in peacetime. This Dashboard highlights key facts and figures about the Statutory Instruments (SIs) being produced using these powers in the Coronavirus Act 2020 and other Acts of Parliament.
Briefings / The Economic Crime (Transparency and Enforcement) Bill: four delegated powers that should be amended to improve future accountability to Parliament
The Bill seeks to crack down on ‘dirty money’ and corrupt elites in the UK and is being expedited through Parliament following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This briefing identifies four delegated powers in the Bill that should be amended to ensure future accountability to Parliament.
Articles / Brexit and Beyond: Delegated Legislation
The end of the transition period is likely to expose even more fully the scope of the policy-making that the government can carry out via Statutory Instruments, as it uses its new powers to develop post-Brexit law. However, there are few signs yet of a wish to reform delegated legislation scrutiny, on the part of government or the necessary coalition of MPs.