Virtual parliament only works if MPs can vote – POLITICO

Angus MacNeil is the Scottish National Party MP for Na h-Eileanan an Iar, the constituency that covers the Outer Hebrides, one of the furthest from Westminster.

ISLE OF BARRA, Scotland — As the crow flies it’s 481 miles between Westminster and the Isle of Barra, at the south end of my constituency, and 526 miles from my Stornoway office, in the north of my constituency, to Westminster.

To provide some perspective, London to Brussels is 200 miles as the crow flies. But to crown it all, despite the long journey from the constituency to the House of Commons, traveling from one end of the 150-mile-long constituency to the other often takes more time than getting to Westminster due to the need to match the timing of two ferries in the Hebridean chain that link the islands of the Outer Hebrides.

Travel to England is not straightforward. For a start, flight times from Barra’s beach airport vary due to the tide. In reality that means a drive to the airport, a flight from Barra to Glasgow, another flight from Glasgow to London and then a Tube ride, preferably from London City Airport to the House of Commons. It can take as few as four and a half hours on a good day but closer to six hours is more typical.

Going back to the constituency can take longer. Whereas I can gamble on timings for catching a plane in London to Glasgow — there will always be another one within a couple of hours — a gamble on the second leg of the journey is more risky and I can easily get stranded in Glasgow if there isn’t another plane until the next day. Even if there is a plane, I also have to hope a seat is available. Sometimes due to weather the plane might not go at all.

A virtual parliament — and especially remote voting — would stop a huge amount of unnecessary journeys by MPs.

It is notable over my years as an MP that Glasgow Airport has deliberately made itself more inefficient, making the transits through it longer and slower so more shops are passed. The primary function of transportation seems secondary, an important point to note when trying to dart between flights on a Monday and another two at the end of the week.

I even recall one time about 10 years ago, during an early December snowstorm, I made it down from the Hebrides to Westminster only to find that the snow meant many English MPs couldn’t make the journey to parliament. Oddly they suspended parliament that evening — oh, if it worked that way for all MPs beaten by weather.

I did propose remote voting before — manna to the tabloid hack trying to ingratiate himself to his bosses. Now its time has come because, sadly, argument and principle seldom win the day. However, now with the pressing events of coronavirus, the myopia of vested interests and the fog of unthinking tradition are rightly cast aside.

A virtual parliament — and especially remote voting — would stop a huge amount of unnecessary journeys by MPs, maybe even by as much as half depending on the MP.

Statistics on how many MPs speak in a typical week in the House of Commons or Westminster Hall may give a clue as to the number of journeys which could be cut. Reducing travel would be popular with the public, I hope and think, as well as good for my blood pressure. A reduction in travel would, of course, also be good for the environment, which is a key issue for many MPs and their constituents.

Scottish MPs aren’t always allowed to vote. Some debates are covered by a process know as EVEL (English Votes for English Laws), which ensures legislation that only affects England, or England and Wales, is decided on by MPs from those constituencies. I, of course, wish that every Westminster debate was a matter for English MPs only and I firmly believe that Westminster’s politicians will someday match the Germans and French by proving they too can govern themselves without any help from the Scots. EVEL is an easy illustration of the need not to be in Westminster for every debate but many MPs also only need to be there for one section of the parliamentary business in the day.

Constituency events held during the week when parliament sits are sometimes impossible for MPs to attend. It is tricky to visit schools and businesses when Monday-Thursday is spent in London. A virtual parliament would help MPs attend these important events and still participate remotely in parliament without needing to physically be in Westminster.

A virtual parliament might also allow MPs to participate fully and not miss out when they are away on site visits with their House of Commons committees or with All Party Parliamentary Groups.

The progress toward a virtual parliament made by the House of Commons and digital services in the last few weeks must be commended, but I hope that further steps will be taken to ensure remote voting will also be included. The only way to make a success of this virtual parliament is to ensure we are able to vote, especially if lockdown continues. MPs must be allowed to vote remotely and this must continue after the crisis.

Everyone has access to the internet so it’s perfectly possible to make parliament accessible everywhere — indeed my internet speed on the Hebridean croft is faster than in my London office.

Of course a virtual parliament will not replace the normal parliamentary set-up. Many relationships and friendships are formed passing in corridors, at meetings or receptions, and these are difficult to recreate online. Generally, MPs are gregarious people with an interest in their fellow man, or so one would sincerely hope. Among my political foes I count friends and good acquaintances which comes from face-to-face interaction, sometimes as opponents.

From my vantage point, a virtual parliament would never replace meeting in person but, I think, would enhance the House of Commons.

While writing this a neighbor phoned to say a lamb of mine had managed to escape onto the road. So a virtual parliament has already saved one cross texel lamb in the Hebrides. It is surely off to a good start.