Stephen's views on Parliamentary reform

I have been an advocate of Parliamentary reform for two decades. I have always believed in an honest and transparent approach to politics and expect high ethical standards of my fellow Members of Parliament. I stood for election because I wanted to change Bristol and Britain for the better. I welcomed the election of John Bercow MP as the new Speaker of the House of Commons because I wished to see the old Speaker replaced with a reform-minded MP, capable of restoring the reputation of Parliament. The House of Commons is in dire need of reform. I want the Commons to be at the centre of national life, being seen to be the place where issues of importance are debated, where the government is scrutinised and where real change can be made. Instead the current House gives the impression of being an exclusive private members' club that is out of touch with the outside world.

2009 Queen's Speech

The Liberal Democrats believe that the Queen's Speech was a political charade that should have been dropped in favour of a programme of political reform. After the expenses scandal, this Parliament has undermined its own legitimacy. Not in living memory has confidence in politicians, trust in the system or faith in the government's capacity to lead been as low as it is at the moment. The remaining months of this Parliament should be used to clean up the mess in British politics. The Liberal Democrats believe that the best gift that this failed Parliament can give its successor is a fresh start, consisting of the following:

• Recall power for MPs suspended for misconduct - so we never again have to wait months and years to get rid of people who have betrayed the trust of the people they represent;
• Code of conduct for candidates in the next election, including declaration of financial and taxation interests - so everyone elected can command full public confidence;
• House of Lords reform - so only elected representatives have the power to make our laws;
• Party funding reform in time for the next election - so big money and the whiff of corruption it brings are removed from politics for good;
• Fixed term Parliaments - so the voters can never again be toyed with by a Prime Minister planning an election timetable purely to serve his party's interests;
• A new, fair voting system for Parliamentary and local elections;
• Changes to House of Commons procedure to reduce executive power - so never again can a government use the power of the whips to ride roughshod over the views of Parliament.

Electoral Reform

This country cannot truly call itself a representative democracy when the make-up of our legislative body is determined by a handful of voters in a few marginal seats, and when one party can attain a governing majority with just 35% of the popular vote, which was the share won by Tony Blair in 2005. Any meaningful response to the recent political crisis must address not only the expenses system, but the voting system that makes MPs in safe seats unaccountable to their voters and leaves people disempowered and disconnected from politics. Many of my fellow MPs are effectively 'Life MPs', not much better than Life Peers in the House of Lords.

The government's recent promise that it will hold a referendum on the alternative vote system some time in the next parliament is simply not good enough - especially as Labour reneged on its 1997 promise to hold a referendum on a proportional system, which alternative vote is not. The Liberal Democrats are tabling amendments to the Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill that will show how a proportional system based on Single Transferable Vote could be implemented for Westminster elections, with multimember constituencies based on local authority boundaries. This is not prohibitively complex to implement, as the opponents of electoral reform often claim. Indeed, it is much less complex than David Cameron's commitment to reduce the number of MPs without changing the present electoral system.

Party Funding

For too long, big money has dominated politics and my Liberal Democrat colleagues and I believe that it must be taken out of it. Because Labour and the Tories benefit most from this, they do not want the system changed. The funding of political parties should be reformed to prevent individuals and organisations being able to 'buy' influence or appointments to the peerage. Spending rules should also be reformed to prevent political parties from buying elections by targeting marginal seats or using avoidance strategies to circumvent spending limits. The Liberal Democrats are the only party committed to overhauling the current unsustainable system of party funding, as set out in the government commissioned independent report by Hayden Phillips. Our proposals are:

• A cap on donations from a single individual or organisation in any given year of £50,000. This would deal with the problem of 'buying' influence;
• A spending cap for political parties (including national, regional and local branches) which applies across the electoral cycle - not just at election-time;
• Local spending caps for expenditure in any individual constituency, also to apply across the electoral cycle. This would deal marginal seat targeting;
• Trade union contributions to be subject to a clear and transparent process of informed consent, linking the intention of the individual members to the donation's destination;
• Rules to prevent impermissible donors from using companies they control as conduits for donations to UK political parties;
• We also support state funding of political parties on a proportional basis related to the votes gained in the previous general election, with regional party funding being based on their performance in the relevant area.

MPs' Expenses, Sir Thomas Legg Audit, Kelly Report and 'IPSA'

During my tenure as an MP not only have I always adhered to the letter of the rules, but moreover, I have used my professional training as a tax and business consultant to good effect and claimed only for expenses that I thought were justifiable in any other vocation. Sir Thomas Legg was appointed to audit MPs accommodation expenses and to inform them of the individual findings of the Parliamentary Committee for Standards in Public Life's inquiry into expenses. Unsurprisingly, in the letter I received from Sir Thomas Legg, I was informed that my London flat expenses were in order and I would not be asked to pay any money back. I recently received a follow-up letter from Sir Thomas Legg thanking me for my co-operation and pronouncing that he is satisfied that I have complied with the rules and that there are "no issues" pending.

The separate report by Sir Christopher Kelly on future expenses rules has recommended that all affairs pertaining to expenses should be out of MPs' hands, which is the view that my Liberal Democrat colleagues and I have long advocated. It is now for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Agency (IPSA), chaired by Professor Sir Ian Kennedy, to make its recommendations to the House regarding the rules for expenses.

It is the view of the Liberal Democrats that the responsibility for organising and dealing with MPs accommodation expenses should lie with the House of Commons, so that rent and bills would be handled by the House and the expenses would not be dealt with by MPs themselves, thus removing the opportunity for Members to adapt the rules to their own advantage. I have previously voted in favour of the resolutions for there to be full disclosure of non-Parliamentary incomes of MPs. Personally, I believe being the MP of Bristol West is a full time (often in a seven day a week sense) job and do not see how other MPs can justify extra-Parliamentary employment as barristers or Company directors. Furthermore, by having business affairs outside of Parliament these MPs could experience a conflict of interests that would influence their Parliamentary affairs, which I do not see as being appropriate.

For more information you can find full details of my own expense claims online at:

http://mpsallowances.parliament.uk/mpslordsandoffices/hocallowances/allowances-by-mp/stephen-williams

Recall Laws

I hope you will be pleased to hear that, in a previous session of Parliament, I co-sponsored Early Day Motion 2090, which states: "That this House is deeply concerned about the lack of public engagement in political and democratic affairs and the cynicism and distrust of the political system felt by many voters; notes that the recent Power Inquiry found that this is all too often borne out of a sense of disempowerment; believes that new measures are required to enable voters to participate more fully in the political system; welcomes the provisions of the Parliamentary Elections (Recall and Primaries) Bill tabled by a cross-party group of hon. Members that would permit voters to recall their hon. Member in certain specified circumstances and also require a returning officer to hold primary elections if requested to do so by any local political party with the support of at least 1,000 voters; further notes that the leaders of the three largest political parties have expressed support for the need for new initiatives to engage the public; and hopes that this Bill will become law expeditiously, believing that it will help restore faith in the political process."

In the current Parliamentary session, an EDM on this issue has been tabled by my Liberal Democrat colleague David Howarth, which I signed on 23rd November 2009. This EDM (number 172) states: "That this House believes that where an hon. Member has been duly determined seriously to have broken the rules of the House, with the result that the hon. Member has been suspended from the service of the House for a period greater than one week, or where an hon. Member has been convicted of a criminal offence that relates to his or her service in the House, the electors of the hon. Member's constituency should have the right to petition that the seat be vacated and a by-election called."

In addition, on 23rd November 2009 I also signed EDM 148 regarding the Citizens' Convention (Accountability and Ethics) Bill, which states: "That this House is concerned at the current crisis of confidence regarding the political system; maintains that electors and not just politicians should be involved in initiating change; supports the provisions of the Citizens' Convention (Accountability and Ethics) Bill introduced in the last Session; believes that these provisions should be enacted expeditiously; and calls on the Government to provide sufficient additional time for any such Bill introduced in the present Session to be enacted."

House of Lords Reform

I have long supported a fully elected House of Lords with members elected on a regional basis, in that sense mirroring the United States Senate. There are arguments that this will lead to equal electoral legitimacy and hence would create a deadlock in Parliament. However a number of examples from abroad show that it can work. I believe that the House of Commons ought to still be the primary chamber. The second chamber (to be called the Senate) would be a revising and scrutinising chamber which would compliment the Commons, with the pre-eminence of the Commons based on the principle that a government will still stand or fall depending on whether they have the confidence of the Commons. The Senate would provide a direct regional influence in Parliament, and would have an enhanced role in the consideration of European business and international treaties. Both Houses would be responsible for legislation, with the Senate being able to impose so much delay in the passing of a bill as to enable the opinion of the nation to be adequately expressed upon it. The government has squandered the opportunity in the last decade to introduce a reformed second chamber. Hopefully we will soon complete the reform to the House of Lords that began in 1911!

Summer Activities

I would like to take an opportunity to set out how I have spent my time during the summer recess period, which ran from July 21st to October 12th 2009. There have been many misrepresentations of the summer recess in the media and by lobbying groups claiming that it is just an eighty three day holiday for MPs, but, for me at least, this was certainly not the case. I have spent the vast majority of time in all the Parliamentary recesses since I was elected in May 2005 at my home in Kingsdown in the heart of Bristol West. In the summer period when Parliament is not sitting I am able to devote more time to constituency affairs. This year, among other things, I visited Bishop Rd School and St Barnabas School, met the Bristol Civic Society, attended the annual Amnesty International garden party, visited several local businesses to discuss the recession and spent a morning with the 'Children of the nineties' research project. In addition to these visits, I spoke at business networking events, two public meetings in Bishopston and Kingsdown, an 'operation Black vote' event and at the opening of the Future Inn at Cabot Circus. I also attended numerous local events and of course held advice surgeries.

As for holidays, I had four working days in Northern Ireland and five days in Malta. Since my election as your MP I have had fewer holidays than I had in a 'normal' job! It is absurd of the media to suggest that MPs only 'work' when Parliament is sitting. Most of my evenings, most Saturdays and many Sundays are taken up either by national responsibilities or local events. In addition, letters and emails are dealt with all year round whether it is a Parliamentary day or not.