Those terms remain in use today. Most government legislation involves a three-line whip to ensure it goes through, but the circumstances can become even more acute than that. In 2021, for instance, Tory MP Owen Paterson was found guilty by the Committee on Standards of an “egregious case of paid advocacy” after he used his parliamentary position to promote two companies that hired him as a paid consultant. The committee recommended that he be suspended from the Commons for 30 days, but the government moved to protect him. Ian Dunt (born 4 February 1982) is a British author, political journalist and broadcaster. He currently writes as a columnist for the i. [1] He previously served for many years as the Editor of politics.co.uk. He was also a host on the Remainiacs podcast. [2] [3] [4] Early life [ edit ] In a series of deeply informed and carefully worked out examples, Ian Dunt takes us through the Westminster labyrinth to reveal an omnishambles. It is not – and he is clear here – because the people involved are corrupt or lazy. It is because the system is not fit for purpose. MPs are impossibly burdened by having to do two jobs simultaneously, first as local representatives and then as national politicians. Most of their constituency work is stuff that should be done by councils, were these not also failing. Cabinet ministers often appear poorly briefed, but they may have up to 20 meetings a day and can’t always start on their red boxes until the rest of us have already gone to bed. Here and there Dunt finds reason to be cautiously cheerful. The House of Lords has shown remarkable independence, a real ability to affect the outcome of legislation by managing its own timetable and contributing much-needed expertise (the cross-bench system, he argues, works particularly well). And select committees turn out to offer a model of how things should be done – listening to the evidence and privileging cooperation and compromise over crude partisanship. But even though the whips are less brutal than they used to be, the basic enforcement mechanism remains in place. If you rebel, you will probably write yourself off from a ministerial position, at least under the current leadership. If you insist on assessing legislation on its own terms rather than simply voting as you’re told, you will sabotage your political career. These incentives would be effective on most people, but they are particularly effective on MPs. As Ashley Weinberg’s psychological research on MPs showed, they are disproportionately likely to be motivated by authority and social recognition and to value leadership positions.

Westminster – and make MPs How the whips actually control Westminster – and make MPs

The complexity of Parliament and the ignorance of its inhabitants are both part of a system of control. It is useful for the party leadership that the situation should remain this way, so it does. The most harrowing thing” about Grayling, Dunt writes, “is that he is a completely standard example of the quality of the ministerial class in Britain.” But this book is more than a harangue about why we get the wrong politicians. It explains, chapter by chapter, the classes of people who hold political power in the UK: from the voters (once in a while) to parliament (barely at all), the prime minister (less than you think), cabinet ministers (more than you think), the Treasury (just as much as you think), the civil service and the press. Dunt began his career as a journalist for PinkNews. He then switched to political analysis for Yahoo!, before becoming Political Editor of Erotic Review, a position he held until January 2010, when he became editor of politics.co.uk. He regularly appears on TV, commenting on political developments in the United Kingdom. [7] It put MPs on a three-line whip to dismiss the committee report and scrap the existing standards system. Many Tory MPs were dismayed by what they were being asked to do: 13 rebelled against the whip. Others abstained, which means they refused to vote either way. But the party disciplinary system held together. It won the vote by 250 to 232. There’s a small army of people involved in the parliamentary whipping operation. On the Government side you have the chief whip, who is appointed by the Prime Minister, along with three senior whips, six other whips and seven assistant whips. The opposition has a chief whip, a deputy and perhaps 12 or 13 others.At this point, the whips will go into action. If the situation is desperate enough, they’ll sometimes resort to trying to manhandle MPs into voting for the party line. “I have literally seen people being physically pushed into the aye lobby or the no lobby,” MP Caroline Lucas says. “They’re still protesting, saying, ‘I’m not sure if I want to vote this way.’ And the whip pushes them in, because once you’re over the line, then the convention is you can’t reverse out again.” It is not about the failure of a particular project. It is systematic and existential,” Dunt writes. “In short,” he says, prefiguring Succession’s Logan Roy, “it is about whether this is a serious country or not.” Any reader of this essential guide will struggle to conclude that we are. Dunt diverges from other books bemoaning the state of our politics: they often call for an elected House of Lords, but he argues it is “one of the best-functioning institutions in Westminster”, rigorously evaluating bills in a way the Commons does not. “There is no need at all to make the Lords democratic.” It’s changed enormously,” veteran Tory rebel Peter Bone says. “When I first came in in 2005, it was very much ‘you’ve got to do what you’re told’. I remember being summoned in with Brian Binley by the senior deputy chief whip about some abstention we made and being talked to like we were schoolboys by the headmaster. They would threaten you with your career. I’ve been sworn at. All that sort of stuff.”

Westminster is broken - New Statesman Westminster is broken - New Statesman

When new members of Parliament enter the building, they are suddenly presented with an impossibly complex web of rules, conventions, precedents and demands that they have no experience of nor any training for. Former Special Advisers – spads – have an advantage, in that they know how Westminster works and how to navigate it. Former lawyers do too, because they can at least read legislation. The rest have no experience of what is happening at all.

Cummings' Barnard Castle trip 'blew a hole in public confidence', Covid inquiry told

The book is at its most illuminating when it focuses on one of the least scrutinised power blocs in the UK: the civil service. Dunt cites the example of Antonia Romeo, the civil servant who carried out Grayling’s ruinous probation reform, which was cancelled in 2018 after offences spiked, costs spiralled and probation providers went bankrupt. Romeo was nevertheless promoted. “No one lost their job, or was penalised, or even rebuked,” Dunt writes, echoing Dominic Cummings’s fundamental criticism of the civil service, that promotion bears no relation to performance. The central mechanism for enforcing the compliance of MPs is the Whips’ Office – the surveillance and disciplinary system for parliamentary votes. It threatens MPs who vote against their party, rewards those who vote with it, and passes intelligence up to the leadership about any possible rebellions.

Ian Dunt’s How Westminster Works … and Why It Doesn’t Ian Dunt’s How Westminster Works … and Why It Doesn’t

Tim Fortescue, Tory chief whip in the 1970s, admitted in a 1995 documentary that the whips office had covered up MP scandals. “If we could get a chap out of trouble,” he said, “then he will do as we ask forever more.” In May 2017, Dunt was part of the team that launched Remainiacs, a political podcast about Britain's departure from the European Union, as seen from a pro- Remain perspective. In January 2020 the same team launched The Bunker, a podcast similar in format that discusses political issues other than Brexit. [8] In October 2020, Remainiacs was renamed Oh God, What Now? [9] Bibliography [ edit ] As well as enforcement, the whips deal in intelligence. One of their chief roles is to gather information on the mood of the parliamentary party and then pass it up to the leadership, so it can assess the threat of rebellion. But information is also itself a form of enforcement. It is the whips who explain parliamentary procedure to MPs. You’re humiliated by the whips, who force you to vote on the party line day in, day out,” Rory Stewart says. “There’s barely any point reading the legislation. It becomes clear your promotion has nothing to do with expertise. It’s about loyalty and defending the indefensible. The culture in the tearoom is very gossipy and trivialising. You can’t earnestly grab someone in the corridor and try to talk seriously about a policy issue. It’s not the done thing. It’s a very unserious culture. It doesn’t reward earnestness in any way.” Whip scandals The importance of a vote was once communicated by how many times it had been underlined. A single-line whip was non-binding, a two-line whip was an instruction, with attendance required unless given prior permission, and a three-line whip was of the utmost seriousness, with failure to attend and vote as directed possibly leading to exclusion from the Parliamentary party.For many MPs, the moment of rebellion (during a vote) is traumatic. “It was horrible,” Lisa Nandy says. “You’re walking through the division lobby and your colleagues are swearing at you. These are people I’d been mates with.”