almost 9 years ago by Asoka Obeyesekere under in ஆய்வறிக்கை

The use of data analysis to make a business decision is a key tool for a CEO. Similarly, data can help inform a citizen when casting their vote at an election.

202 MPs from the last Parliament are contesting the upcoming election. Using the dataset, which comprises over 28,000 Hansard records between May 2012 and June 2015, a wealth of new perspectives emerge. This information, in addition to MP voting records, can be found on the new Election Homepage. Here are a few key highlights.

Constituents under-represented

Of the 202 MPs, 30% have never filed a public petition in Parliament on behalf of a constituent. A further 13% have only done so once. Therefore 43% have neglected the practice of petitioning for their constituents, which according to a former secretary general of Parliament is supposed to “enable a citizen to bring to the notice of Parliament the flaws in the administrative machinery of the Government”. MPs must justify this lack of constituent representation.

Blinkered ministerial oversight

Similarly, consultative committees of parliament exist for every ministry with the objective of MPs providing oversight and inquiry. This system envisages feedback through recommendations, which in turn will enrich legislation. Every MP is assigned to a series of consultative committees. However, analysing the minutes of these committee meetings, which have been publicly reported (stemming from an initiative of for 7 months between May and November 2014, illustrates some harsh realities.

33% of MPs have never raised a single action point in their committees. A further 45% average less than one action point per month. This inactivity of 78% of MPs illustrates a paralysis within the committee system, which requires urgent attention. MPs must not only start playing a more active role, but they must also refocus on the legislative function envisaged for the committees.  The burning question is whether MPs in the new Parliament will strive to remedy these performance shortfalls.

Better behaved than expected

On a more promising note, 37% of re-contesting MPs have never been disruptive in Parliament and a further 14% have been rarely disruptive. This includes being disruptive during debates or using a procedure known as a point of order in an improper manner to disrupt. This clarifies a misconception that the majority of MPs are disruptive. Far from it, many behave within the standing orders (rules) of Parliament. It however only takes a few misbehavers, coupled with a lenient Speaker, to make Parliament dysfunctional. 

As these data points would suggest, there is a lot of information that can be ascertained about MP parliamentary performance. Every re-contesting MP has a report card on, which highlights these interesting facts.

Do you feel a data driven parliamentary analysis of MP actions should underpin a citizen’s vote? Or does it miss the core essence of a MP working within their constituency? Share your thoughts and questions at; over Twitter @manthrilk, or by text to the hotline: 071-4639882.