Politics

Parliament's next crisis: a dangerous shortage of middle-aged men

When ex-ministers immediately quit the Commons, a vital resource is lost

26 July 2014

9:00 AM

26 July 2014

9:00 AM

The House of Commons is off for the summer. But few MPs and ministers expect to make it through to September without the House being recalled because of the grim international situation. This has been the worst year for the West in foreign policy terms since 1979. A terrorist enclave has been established in the heart of the Middle East, Iraq has confirmed its status as an Iranian vassal state, Russia has annexed Crimea with minimal consequences and the West has not even been able to come up with a robust response to Moscow-backed rebels shooting down a civilian airliner in eastern Ukraine.

There will, though, be no desire in No. 10 to make MPs return early. Everyone there remembers how they were summoned last summer — and promptly defeated the government. David Cameron wanted their backing for strikes on Syria to punish the Assad regime for its use of chemical weapons in the civil war. Barack Obama then felt obliged to consult Congress before taking action. Ultimately, the Commons vote resulted in no US-led air strikes.

Whatever one thinks of Parliament’s decision, one can’t dispute that it was significant. MPs had demonstrated that even on matters of war and peace, the traditional preserves of the executive, they were prepared to stand athwart the Prime Minister. The Commons had shown that, contrary to popular belief, it doesn’t just do what the government tells it to.

The vote might have altered the course of western foreign policy but it doesn’t appear to have changed perceptions of Parliament. It is still a much-derided place and MPs are deeply unsure of the worth of what they are doing. ‘This is the most independent-minded Parliament for a century and yet we are still despised,’ laments one senior MP.

One of the worst indictments of the Commons is how many of those who announced that they were quitting as ministers at the reshuffle simultaneously declared that they would stand down from the Commons at the next election. It is as if they saw little point in being an MP if they were not a minister.


Most of those leaving are not doing so because they are past retirement age. Sir George Young might be 73, but William Hague, Andrew Lansley and David Willetts are only in their fifties and Greg Barker is a mere 48. When they go, they will take expertise and experience that the Commons desperately needs to do its job properly. Former ministers play a particular role in the Commons’ ability to scrutinise what the government is doing. On Budget day in the Gordon Brown era, the most penetrating speech would invariably come from Ken Clarke. Clarke, as a former Chancellor, knew of what he spoke but as a backbencher was free of the constraints of partisan point-scoring. Rather magnificently, the 74-year-old plans to stand at the next election and his contribution after this year’s autumn statement promises to be particularly interesting.

It is a real pity that Willetts will not be available to play the Ken Clarke role on universities and pensions policy, two of his specialist areas. When the 2015 government, as it almost certainly will, decides to change the fees structures for students, the debate will be far poorer for not hearing Willetts’s informed analysis of what it all means.

Cameron will not be overly concerned about former ministers leaving the Commons. In conversation with senior Conservative parliamentarians, he has been clear that he thinks that MPs shouldn’t hang around forever. Cameron, despite his traditional upbringing and education, has a Blairite attitude to institutions and constitutional conventions. However, one can’t imagine even Blair expressing the blithe contempt for the second chamber that Cameron did when he failed to make the new leader of the House of Lords a full member of the Cabinet.

It is easy to see why the idea of shorter Commons careers should appeal to a party leader. If only those who have made it to the top stay on, there’ll be no experienced figures to cause trouble. As one independent-minded backbencher explains, ‘if you’re only coming here for a ten- to 15-year stint, you’re going to put your head down and see if you can make it to ministerial rank as quickly as possible’. There is also a sense that to be successful one needs to get into the Commons at a younger age. It hasn’t been lost on aspirant politicians that five of the seven new faces around the Cabinet table entered Parliament before they had turned 40.

This emphasis on youth precludes people having had a long career outside of politics. One doesn’t have to agree with the former minister who says that ‘we have the worst of all worlds — people who aspire only to be managers but can’t manage’ to think that it is unfortunate that the ambitious feel they have to stand for office before they have had time to reach the top of another profession.

Public cynicism in Britain is high. Only three per cent of Britons report ever having been asked or expected to pay a bribe for public services, the lowest level in the EU. But 69 per cent think that corruption is a major problem: this is the legacy of the MPs’ expenses scandal. For MPs, running into this headwind of scepticism is debilitating.

There are some minor measures that could be taken to improve the work of Parliament. Reducing the number of MPs radically would mean they couldn’t be expected to be social workers. One of those promoted last week says he initially tried to direct constituents seeking assistance to the appropriate place. After a few months, his association chairman warned him to stop doing this because it was making people think he was lazy. He now spends a considerable amount of his time on things that should be the responsibility of councillors. If constituencies were half as big again MPs couldn’t be expected to do this. Also, a more modulated approach to outside interests might encourage more former ministers to stay after losing office.

But the situation is now so serious that it might be only a big-bang reform that can reinvigorate Parliament. The time might have come to consider a full separation of powers, removing the executive from the legislature and giving Parliament its own distinct identity and role.

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.

You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10


Show comments
  • LondonStatto

    “One of the worst indictments of the Commons is how many of those who announced that they were quitting as ministers at the reshuffle simultaneously declared that they would stand down from the Commons at the next election. It is as if they saw little point in being an MP if they were not a minister.”

    Isn’t the cause and effect reversed here? Cameron didn’t want anyone as a minister in the last year of the parliament if they weren’t going to be in the next parliament…

  • Damaris Tighe

    I find it very strange that while the ‘grey’ population is getting larger our elected representatives are getting younger.

  • Amir

    Read this article abput Michael Gove’s demotion:

    http://www.casualpolitics.co.uk/2014/07/aftermath-of-goves-demotion/

  • Laura Zamora

    !!! How Dr.Ukaka Save My Broken Heart Of Marriage Today !!!

    I am Zamora Lisa from USA, i want to share a testimony of my life to every one. i was married to my husband Raymond, i love him so much we have been married for 5 years now with two kids. when he went for a vacation to spain he meant a lady called Clara who en charm him with his beauty, he told me that he is no longer interested in the marriage any more. i was so confuse and seeking for help, i don’t know what to do until I met my friend Miss silvia and told her about my problem. she told me not to worry about it that she had a similar problem before and introduce me to a man called Dr ukaka. who cast a spell on her ex and bring him back to her after 3days. Miss Rose ask me to contact Dr ukaka. I contacted him to help me bring back my husband and he ask me not to worry about it that the gods of his fore-fathers will fight for me. He told me by three days he will re-unite me and my husband together. After three day my husband called and told me he is coming back to sought out things with me, I was surprise when I saw him and he started crying for forgiveness and that he never knew what came upon him that he will never leave me again or the kids.it was the spell that was casted on him that was working on him. Right now I am the happiest woman on earth for what this great spell caster did for me and my husband, you can contact Dr.ukaka on any problem in this world, he is very nice, here is his contact freedomlovespell@hotmail.com. or contact him through his website address: freedomlovespelltemple.yolasite.com

  • rtj1211

    Rather than reforming Parliament, how about reforming the Media?

    The electorate need to see through the media and get more direct information. It is entirely counter-productive to have rottweilers in every newspaper hammering tribal nonsense day after day, month after month. The truth does not out, so electorates make poor choices. They don’t have the time to be MI5 investigators, seeing through spin etc etc. They need the truth. They never get it from the Press as is. So they are going to have to get it from somewhere else.

    The obvious role for Parliament is ex ante due diligence of proposed legislation. It seems to me that a poor version of this is done by the media, which is entirely inappropriate. The media should be doing the post-facto hangings as it were. AS the media do not represent the people, they should not be slanting due dili to the interests of their proprietors. The elected representatives must do it. I am not talking primarily about primary legislation, I am talking about budgetary allocations, project funding etc etc. The Public Accounts Committee should be forensic accountants, technical due diligence experts, commercial due diligence experts etc etc. They shouldn’t be trusting the civil service’s figures, they should be checking it all out. The Education Select Committee should be scrutinising proposals for e.g. new Free Schools, not ascerbically haranguing Mr Gove for the fact that a few of them shouldn’t have been funded in the first place. Mr Gove had a conflict of interest – his programme needed to fly and fly fast, so he probably let a few under the radar that he shouldn’t have. The Select Committee would have picked up on that and the programme would be even better than it has been.

    The obvious suggestion is that, to stand as an MP, you have to be suitably qualified to make a real contribution to at least of the Select Committees with the new powers. This would eliminate more and more career politicians of no skills whatever and encourage a broader range of experience into the House of Commons. Doctors, nurses, paramedics, hospital managers should be on a Health Select Committee, amongst others. Scientists, engineers, venture capitalists, industry managers etc should be on a Science and Technology Select Committee. Etc etc.

    This all needs to be fleshed out, but the value add for Parliament is eliminating ex ante enormous amounts of waste through superb scrutiny of proposals, allied to making suggestions as to how they could be improved. The never ending exposure of cock-ups without disciplinary adjustments to procedure does rather suggest that you have a culture where tough love, a ‘short sharp shock’ cannot be administered to Whitehall if necessary……..perhaps it is time for that to change too??

  • rtj1211

    Rather than reforming Parliament, how about reforming the Media?

    The electorate need to see through the media and get more direct information. It is entirely counter-productive to have rottweilers in every newspaper hammering tribal nonsense day after day, month after month. The truth does not out, so electorates make poor choices. They don’t have the time to be MI5 investigators, seeing through spin etc etc. They need the truth. They never get it from the Press as is. So they are going to have to get it from somewhere else.

    The obvious role for Parliament is ex ante due diligence of proposed legislation. It seems to me that a poor version of this is done by the media, which is entirely inappropriate. The media should be doing the post-facto hangings as it were. AS the media do not represent the people, they should not be slanting due dili to the interests of their proprietors. The elected representatives must do it. I am not talking primarily about primary legislation, I am talking about budgetary allocations, project funding etc etc. The Public Accounts Committee should be forensic accountants, technical due diligence experts, commercial due diligence experts etc etc. They shouldn’t be trusting the civil service’s figures, they should be checking it all out. The Education Select Committee should be scrutinising proposals for e.g. new Free Schools, not ascerbically haranguing Mr Gove for the fact that a few of them shouldn’t have been funded in the first place. Mr Gove had a conflict of interest – his programme needed to fly and fly fast, so he probably let a few under the radar that he shouldn’t have. The Select Committee would have picked up on that and the programme would be even better than it has been.

    The obvious suggestion is that, to stand as an MP, you have to be suitably qualified to make a real contribution to at least of the Select Committees with the new powers. This would eliminate more and more career politicians of no skills whatever and encourage a broader range of experience into the House of Commons. Doctors, nurses, paramedics, hospital managers should be on a Health Select Committee, amongst others. Scientists, engineers, venture capitalists, industry managers etc should be on a Science and Technology Select Committee. Etc etc.

    This all needs to be fleshed out, but the value add for Parliament is eliminating ex ante enormous amounts of waste through superb scrutiny of proposals, allied to making suggestions as to how they could be improved. The never ending exposure of cock-ups without disciplinary adjustments to procedure does rather suggest that you have a culture where tough love, a ‘short sharp shock’ cannot be administered to Whitehall if necessary……..perhaps it is time for that to change too??

  • Salminalation

    What possible difference could recalling parliament make to the “grim international situation”. So that a few blowhards can spout their favourite words like “robust” a few times and then retire to the terrrace for a drink?

    The “grim international situation” has been partly created by the stupid and reckless decisions made by some of those in parliament over the last 20 years. The best thing they can do to help now is go on holiday and stay on holiday until things improve and in the meantime do and say nothing.

  • Salminalation

    What possible difference could recalling parliament make to the “grim international situation”. So that a few blowhards can spout their favourite words like “robust” a few times and then retire to the terrrace for a drink?

    The “grim international situation” has been partly created by the stupid and reckless decisions made by some of those in parliament over the last 20 years. The best thing they can do to help now is go on holiday and stay on holiday until things improve and in the meantime do and say nothing.

  • Picquet

    “a dangerous shortage of middle-aged, *white, British, middle-class* men”, if you please. There’s still a few of us taxpayers around.

Close