When we think of ‘Parliament’, often the first image to come to mind is the debating chamber in the House of Commons. But much of Parliament’s work in scrutinising proposed legislation and holding the government to account takes place behind the scenes. Both the House of Commons and the House of Lords have select committees that focus in depth on particular issues, ultimately producing reports with recommendations for the government. Select committees are typically made up of around 11-15 Members of Parliament (MPs) or Lords supported by a small team of staff. Usually, they won’t have specialist knowledge in the subject under review, so they rely on being able to access accurate, balanced evidence – and this is where we, as researchers, can enter the picture. In our last Science in Policy seminar on Thursday 31st May, Alexandra Meakin (Research Associate in the Crick Centre, University of Sheffield) a self-described ‘Parliament nerd’ who has spent over a decade working for MPs and House of Commons Select Committees, shared her top tips for how scientists can make their work accessible and useful for select committees.
There are some fundamental differences between select committees in the House of Commons and the Lords. House of Commons select committees, for instance, mainly shadow specific government departments (e.g. the Defence Committee, the Education Committee), whereas House of Lords’ select committees focus on broad themes that often encompass the work of multiple government departments. For both houses, however, one of the major functions of select committees is to hold inquiries into topical issues that they feel the government should respond to (e.g. through introducing new legislation). For researchers, the most relevant select committee is likely to be the Science and Technology Committees of the Lords and the Commons. Understanding the procedure that select committees follow in launching a new inquiry - particularly the points where the committees are actively looking for evidence – is essential if researchers want their message to be heard at the right time.
There are some fundamental differences between select committees in the House of Commons and the Lords. House of Commons select committees, for instance, mainly shadow specific government departments (e.g. the Defence Committee, the Education Committee), whereas House of Lords’ select committees focus on broad themes that often encompass the work of multiple government departments. For both houses, however, one of the major functions of select committees is to hold inquiries into topical issues that they feel the government should respond to (e.g. through introducing new legislation). For researchers, the most relevant select committee is likely to be the Science and Technology Committees of the Lords and the Commons. Understanding the procedure that select committees follow in launching a new inquiry - particularly the points where the committees are actively looking for evidence – is essential if researchers want their message to be heard at the right time.
Alexandra Meakin, guest speaker at our last seminar. Image Source: Alexandra Meakin
The first stage in an inquiry is a ‘call for evidence’ where the committee invite members of the public to submit oral or written evidence that could inform their report. One might assume that parliament would only want to hear from the upper tiers of academia and industry but Alexandra assured us this was not the case. “A key point to understand is that whilst select committee staff may have some subject knowledge, their remit is huge” she said. “For instance, I suddenly got moved to the transport committee, and suddenly had to become an expert in an area I formerly knew little about.” Even if you are at an early stage of your career, you will almost certainly know far more about your subject than the committee members.
Alexandra also advised that we shouldn’t be put off by the word ‘evidence’; the term has a very different meaning in parliament to its academic associations (e.g. tables and graphs). “Here, ‘evidence’ doesn’t have to be the results from your lab, it can be just your thoughts and views” she said. In fact, simply directing the committee to your latest journal paper is exactly what they are NOT looking for. “A select committee won’t accept a paper: it has to be original material, although it is fine to do a summary of previously published material” she said. But do make sure your submission is relevant to what the committee wants. When an inquiry is launched, the committee will publish either a call for evidence or Terms of Reference (both phrases are used for the same thing) which describe the scope of the inquiry and set out the questions for which the committee are seeking answers. Your evidence doesn’t have to address all of these, but make sure that you mention which terms you are referring to.
If your evidence is compelling enough, the committee may want to hear from you in person and invite you to an oral evidence session, held in the select committee chambers in Portcullis House at Westminster. “Giving oral evidence is a big deal – all the sessions are broadcast live online (and sometimes on BBC Parliament) and are available online afterwards on the UK Parliament website” Alexandra said. “If you are invited, do make sure that you have enough support: your department may be able to provide training to help you prepare”.
Alexandra also advised that we shouldn’t be put off by the word ‘evidence’; the term has a very different meaning in parliament to its academic associations (e.g. tables and graphs). “Here, ‘evidence’ doesn’t have to be the results from your lab, it can be just your thoughts and views” she said. In fact, simply directing the committee to your latest journal paper is exactly what they are NOT looking for. “A select committee won’t accept a paper: it has to be original material, although it is fine to do a summary of previously published material” she said. But do make sure your submission is relevant to what the committee wants. When an inquiry is launched, the committee will publish either a call for evidence or Terms of Reference (both phrases are used for the same thing) which describe the scope of the inquiry and set out the questions for which the committee are seeking answers. Your evidence doesn’t have to address all of these, but make sure that you mention which terms you are referring to.
If your evidence is compelling enough, the committee may want to hear from you in person and invite you to an oral evidence session, held in the select committee chambers in Portcullis House at Westminster. “Giving oral evidence is a big deal – all the sessions are broadcast live online (and sometimes on BBC Parliament) and are available online afterwards on the UK Parliament website” Alexandra said. “If you are invited, do make sure that you have enough support: your department may be able to provide training to help you prepare”.
Alexandra Meakin working for the Transport Committee. She is sitting to the left of the Chair, Louise Ellman MP. The select committee members and staff sit in the horseshoe, with the oral witnesses facing them. Image Source: Alexandra Meakin
Whilst responding to calls for evidence is an effective way to influence policy, Alexandra advised that you can have even more impact by being proactive and making your work known to the committee before a public inquiry is even launched. This could ultimately shape the terms of reference and the direction the inquiry takes. “Even if you are a PhD student, you can get in touch with the staff of a committee and introduce yourself and explain what work you do and why it is likely to be newsworthy in a year or two” she said. You might be well known within your research field, but remember that you could still be ‘invisible’ to the outside world. “Make sure you can be found on the internet and that your Twitter and researcher profile are up to date” Alexandra said. “Select committee staff typically have poor access to scientific journals so often resort to frantic Googling”.
Once they have analysed all the evidence, the committee will draft then publish their report, which the government have 60 days to respond to. “When committees publish their reports, it is a good chance to build your profile by explaining how your research links to the report conclusions and recommendations” said Alexandra. Ultimately, these recommendations could result in new legislation that impacts general society. As an example, evidence submitted by the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition to the House of Commons’ Health Committee’s 2015 inquiry on Childhood Obesity was instrumental in shaping the final report. This included a recommendation for a tax on sugary drinks, which the Government formally introduced as legislation that came into force in April this year.
Once they have analysed all the evidence, the committee will draft then publish their report, which the government have 60 days to respond to. “When committees publish their reports, it is a good chance to build your profile by explaining how your research links to the report conclusions and recommendations” said Alexandra. Ultimately, these recommendations could result in new legislation that impacts general society. As an example, evidence submitted by the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition to the House of Commons’ Health Committee’s 2015 inquiry on Childhood Obesity was instrumental in shaping the final report. This included a recommendation for a tax on sugary drinks, which the Government formally introduced as legislation that came into force in April this year.
Working with Select Committees could be an effective way to make your research known to policy makers in Parliament. Image Source: Wikipedia Commons, Author: Mdbeckwith.
With this in mind, here are Alexandra’s tips for submitting quality evidence for select committees:
- Keep an eye out on the current calls for evidence on the UK Parliament website to see if any relate to your research. Your relevant learned society may also have a policy email newsletter that can help with this.
- Don’t be put off if you are only an early-career researcher: select committees read every piece of evidence submitted so your voice will definitely be heard!
- Be clear if you are submitting evidence as an individual or an organisation. Also be upfront about where the funding comes from for your work.
- Remember that all accepted evidence is published online – so don’t include anything you can’t support, and certainly nothing defamatory (which the committee won’t be able to accept anyway).
- Select committee reports ultimately make recommendations for government policies so if you can explain how your evidence supports (or doesn’t) a particular policy, it will be very useful indeed.
- Even if you miss the deadline, it’s not too late: select committees always want to know if they have missed an alternative point of view.
- If you have significant standing in your field, consider becoming a specialist advisor or even inviting the committee to visit your research institute.
Article by Caroline Wood
RSS Feed