AHC0007

Written evidence submitted by Professor Cristina Leston-Bandeira

 

I write this evidence as Professor of Politics at the University of Leeds. My research expertise is on parliament and public engagement, having published extensively in this area, in relation to the UK Parliament and other parliaments. I am the Chair and co-founder of the International Parliament Engagement Network (IPEN) and a former Chair of the UK Study of Parliament Group. I was awarded the Political Studies Association 2025 Sir Isaiah Berlin Prize for outstanding contributions to political studies.

This submission draws from my research on parliament and public engagement, particularly from my research project on breaking barriers to engagement with parliaments.[1] It also draws from the evidence I gave in 2023 to the Administration Committee’s enquiry into the House’s communication and engagement services, as some of the issues overlap and most of that evidence is still relevant today.[2]

I am responding specifically to the following two questions of the inquiry:

 

Communicating what parliament does as part of a broader approach to engagement

  1. The House of Commons has made great strides in the way it communicates information about what is happening in parliament and how it works. This involves the professionalization of its communication and education and engagement services, and the associated production of a much wider range of communication channels and outputs. Two small examples illustrate the width of this activity: the recent development of short videos to communicate specific types of procedures and roles; and the development of education and outreach SEND sessions.
  2. To develop this practice further, and in a more accessible way, it needs to (1) communicate more through issues, (2) invest more into non-traditional forms of communication, (3) go more where the public is - recognising that there are various types of publics; different types of approaches and of means of communication may be needed to meet the needs of different types of publics – and (4) strengthen strategic collaboration between communication and engagement services.
  3. Parliaments tend to communicate through very procedural type of language (parliamentary jargon) and means (long written form). There are specific reasons for this, namely in terms of supporting the legitimacy of parliamentary work, which needs to accommodate a wide range of political sensibilities. However, if parliaments want to communicate beyond the ‘usual suspects’ (people already engaged with politics), they need to be more pro-active in reaching out to new publics, utilising their language and going to their spaces.
  4. Communication is shaped by other forms of public engagement. When we talk about communicating, we tend to assume a willing public already listening. However, most people do not follow what parliament does or communicates. This is why education, outreach and other forms of public engagement are important, in providing for a foundation upon which to communicate about the work of parliament. This foundation enables to establish knowledge about the institution, but also to identify the relevance of Parliament to our daily lives. This foundation is key to provide accessible information about parliament.
  5. Public engagement is therefore key when considering how to make the way the House of Commons Administration communicates more accessible. The way the HoC communicates should not be seen in isolation, it is framed by other elements of public engagement. Public engagement enables communicating about parliament by capturing people's interest and by giving it a framework that enables people to understand Parliament. From education activities taking place in the Centre for Education, to the outreach work undertaken around the country, to committee engagement work, all of this frames communication; more importantly it frames people's understanding of parliament.

Issues rather than process

  1. People tend to engage through issues – the daily matters that affect their lives. Although it is important to provide explanations about how parliament works, there can sometimes be a tendency to focus on process rather than the issues they facilitate. It should be possible to explain any parliamentary process through issues, such as examples of law they have facilitated. Whilst resources on how parliament works provide for a foundation on which to base engagement and understanding, most people engage with politics through issues, not through a general desire to engage with politics. It is through the issues that people will become captivated by communication about parliament. So, as a specific change, more materials could be developed around the stories of specific people, laws, scrutiny and representation moments.

Invest in non-traditional forms of communication

  1. In order to be more accessible, the House of Commons also needs to use a wider range of means of communication. Communication to wider publics requires a wide range of channels and outputs.
  2. As specific changes, this may include expanding to different type of social media, but also a wider use of Easy Read types of materials, accompanied by more visually based materials such as infographics, short videos, testimonies from people involved in parliamentary work (from citizens to MPs) etc, besides of course a wider integration of accessible formats such as BSL (British Sign Language).
  3. In relation to BSL, the House of Commons may wish to follow the example of the Oireachtas which has an integrated Irish Sign Language (ISL) team of staff. This team not only provides translation into ISL of parliamentary proceedings, but also acts as interlocutors with the ISL community. This has led to a far better understanding of the needs of this community within parliament and to specific initiatives such as the development of a parliamentary jargon glossary in ISL, accessible here: https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/how-parliament-is-run/houses-of-the-oireachtas-service/equality-diversity-and-inclusion/isl-glossary/
  4. The House of Commons could also consider co-producing some of its explanatory materials with outside community groups, to make sure they communicate in a language that is understandable beyond the Westminster village.

Go where the public is

  1. There is often an expectation that the public will come to parliament. Despite the existence of an outreach service since 2008, the fact that committees sometimes meet outside Westminster, and that MPs go back to their constituencies every week, the assumption that the public comes to parliament if it wants to hear about it is still quite embedded. By coming to parliament, one may mean attending parliament physically, but also online spaces such as consulting parliament’s website or following its social media.
  2. If the House of Commons is to make it easier to understand how it works and communicate in a more accessible way, it needs to reach out to diverse publics in their own spaces. From schools to local libraries, to community organisations, to specialised online spaces.
  3. This may involve working far more closely with outside organisations, which can act as important mediators in helping to explain and communicate what parliament does and how it works.
  4. My recent research on breaking barriers to engagement showed the key role played by community organisations to involve and communicate with people beyond the usual suspects, particularly in the case of seldom-heard groups of people. Community organisations often have the trust and well-established relationships with specific groups of people; they are also likely to better understand the challenges these communities face and have better access to them.

Strengthen strategic collaboration between communication and engagement services

  1. The House of Commons has excellent communication services and excellent education and engagement services. But it is not always clear if these work together and/or collaborate in the developing of strategies and materials to communicate and explain how parliament works, and/or what is happening.
  2. Closer work and collaboration between these services could help develop best practice and a better appreciation of working with outside publics beyond the Westminster bubble.
  3. As I say above, explaining how parliament works, or its activity, doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It needs to be based in a strong foundation of citizen-focused services which cover different layers of information and for different types of publics, at different stages of their journey of understanding parliament. As the Administration Committee recommended back in 2023, the House of commons would benefit from having a more robust strategic approach to all matters that relate to public engagement.

 

May 2025

[1] Breaking barriers to engagement with parliaments, project funded by Research England (UKRI): https://essl.leeds.ac.uk/dir-record/research-projects/1298/breaking-barriers-to-engagement-with-parliaments 

[2] Administration Committee (2023) Communicating the Commons: how effectively does the House of Commons Administration communicate about Parliament? – First Report of Session 2023-24, HC 306, available at: https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/42252/documents/210055/default/