The recent 2024 General Election marked a significant shift in British politics, as voters increasingly turned away from the traditional dominance of the Labour and Conservative parties. This election resulted in thirteen different parties and six independents winning seats in the House of Commons, creating the most fragmented Parliament in history. This trend has continued in the recent Caerphilly by-election, where both major parties experienced a decline in their voter base. Yet, despite these developments in public sentiment, the operational rules within Westminster remain firmly entrenched.
Research published in The Political Quarterly by Dr. Louise Thompson from The University of Manchester highlights how outdated parliamentary rules prevent smaller parties from participating fully in the decision-making process. According to Dr. Thompson, the current structure of Parliament functions as if it were still the 1950s, when only two major parties held sway over British politics. “Smaller parties are treated unfairly in parliament’s rules, even though their MPs represent a growing share of the electorate. That creates a real democratic deficit,” she stated.
Challenges for Smaller Parties
Under the existing rules, only the government, the official opposition, and the third-largest party enjoy guaranteed speaking time, committee chairs, and opportunities to hold the government accountable. This leaves smaller parties, such as the Greens, Reform UK, Plaid Cymru, and the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), without essential rights. As a result, MPs from these parties often find themselves waiting for hours to speak, and in many cases, they are never called upon at all.
The exclusion of smaller parties is not merely a symbolic issue. Without representation on select committees, these parties lack the ability to scrutinise proposed legislation effectively. Additionally, without guaranteed slots in debates, they cannot raise issues that are important to their constituents. Dr. Thompson underscores this disparity by stating, “All MPs are elected equally, but inside Westminster, some are definitely more equal than others.”
Currently, smaller parties rely on informal arrangements to be heard, often depending on the goodwill of larger parties or the Speaker of the House to allocate time for their questions. This system is inconsistent and can be retracted at any time, ultimately favouring those parties that maintain strong relationships with the larger players.
Proposed Reforms for a Fairer System
Dr. Thompson argues that this approach is inadequate for a modern democracy. Her research recommends that Westminster must update its rulebook to reflect the current multi-party landscape. She calls for formal guarantees in the Commons’ Standing Orders, which would provide smaller parties with fair speaking rights, seats on committees, and access to debates.
Additionally, she suggests that Westminster look to devolved parliaments for inspiration, proposing the implementation of minimum thresholds for party rights and expanding opportunities for smaller party MPs to participate in committees where they have relevant expertise. Dr. Thompson emphasizes that these reforms would not drastically change the system but would enhance transparency, consistency, and fairness for all MPs, regardless of their party affiliation.
The ongoing evolution of British politics calls for a Parliament that accurately reflects the diverse views of the electorate. By addressing the needs of smaller parties, Westminster can strengthen its democratic foundations and ensure that all voices are heard in the political process.
