My son did his Extended Project Qualification (EPQ) in 2018, at Hills Road Sixth Form College, Cambridge, and it was really interesting to watch. For something worth just half an A-level (and in reality when it comes to university applications, worth nothing), it required an astonishing amount of work. For busy sixth-formers to find the time or the motivation requires some dedication. That said, the EPQ is a good introduction to doing a properly planned and structured research project, so I encouraged my son to take the trouble. He did so, and his project was eventually marked 100% (A*) in 2019.
A few websites I feel obliged to recommend to you, mainly because I had a hand in making them.
Heidi Allen MP in the House of Commons, 2 November 2017. In response to some right-winger making some typically appalling comment.
I once tried to explain the parliamentary electoral system to a teenage relative, using footballing terms. It’s not a perfect analogy, but it’s a lot more perfect than the way we choose our government.
“Imagine we’re having an election to choose which club plays in the Champions League next season – Chelsea, Manchester United, Accrington Stanley, whoever”
“However, we don’t get to vote for which team we want; each part of the country gets to vote for one of the players. So let’s say in East Anglia, we get to vote for the left-back.”
“So if I think Southampton’s left-back is the best left-back in the country, I would vote for him?”
“That’s right; you don’t get to vote for the club which is going to play in the Champions League next season, but you do get to vote for your favourite left-back.”
“OK… so if in East Anglia, we choose Southampton’s left-back, how does that affect the club which is going to play in the Champions League?”
“Well, once all the players have been chosen, by voters in different parts of the country, they see which club has the most players elected, and that club gets to play in the Champions League.”
“Eh? So if six of the players chosen are from Chelsea, then Chelsea are in the Champions League, even if their left-back (who we didn’t want) is rubbish?”
“Yep. Actually, it might only need three or four players from Chelsea to be chosen, as long as they’ve got more than any other club.”
“So how can I get, say, Manchester United to be our club in the Champions League?”
“Well, you could vote for Manchester United’s left-back.”
“But he’s rubbish too. I wouldn’t want to vote for him.”
“That’s all the choice they give you, unfortunately.”
“What happens to Southampton’s left-back if we choose him, but overall it’s Chelsea who end up as our club in the Champions League?”
“Southampton’s left-back would get to go to the match and hang around a bit, but he wouldn’t be in the team. Chelsea’s left-back would be the one who plays.”
“That’s just stupid.”
“That’s how they make sure it’s the same old clubs in the Champions League every season, even if they don’t have the best players.”
Earlier this year I was part of a small group which organised a hustings event for a local council election here in Cambridge. We think it was a great success, and a real asset to local democracy. One or two people came along from other parts of the city and told us they’d love to hold similar events in their parts of the city. I promised I’d write up what we did, if for no other reason than to demonstrate how straightforward the process is. I hope it might inspire you to do the same, wherever you live. There’s a video of our event down the page.
If you do hold your own hustings event, let me know how it went in the comments!
What is a Hustings? Why organise one?
Quite simply, it’s a public meeting before an election, where all the candidates come along to pitch to the voters in person. We think it offers two great things to us as voters:
- We get to see and hear the candidates. Although many candidates will be deluging local residents with literature coming up to the election, we all know that they probably didn’t write it, and literature doesn’t really give us any idea of what the candidates are actually like.
- We meet all of the candidates! The main political parties have a big advantage in that they have the money and manpower to tell everyone about their candidate. Who hasn’t gone to the polls and seen names on the ballot paper who we didn’t even know were standing? A hustings event gives smaller parties or independent candidates the chance to compete on a level playing field.
Who can organise a Hustings?
Anybody! Naturally, if you have a residents’ association or something similar to back the event, it’s a big help. But any small group of concerned individuals can easily make it happen.
So what’s involved?
Here’s our experience. You need to get going about 6 to 8 weeks before the election. So if it’s an early May election, I’d suggest starting to plan the event in early March. You can contact the candidates to let them know when you’re holding the event, and give them information about it, as soon as they’re all declared. The closing date for nominations is 19 working days before the election (four weeks), which is normally a Friday evening. Obviously the organising council will have that information for you.
Before then you can get working on the following:
- Booking the venue
- Planning the publicity
You can leave the publicity until after the nomination deadline day, as most people aren’t interested in putting dates in their diaries more than two or three weeks ahead. But you might have a community newsletter or other publicity outlet which comes out before nomination day, so check for that.
The date of the event can be set well in advance. We’d suggest about halfway between the close of nominations and election day, so late April for an early-May election. Don’t worry about the candidates’ availability; they should have cleared their social and professional lives for the duration of the four weeks leading up to the election, so they’ll fit in with what you’ve organised.
We had four candidates standing in our election, and made a point of visiting them all personally to confirm their details and to tell them about the event’s format (“It’s a bit like Question Time, you’ll be in front of the audience, the same questions will be put to all of you, and that’s it”). The information we gathered was used to put together a preview document (see below).
Your chosen venue may need a sound system. If you’re expecting more than about 20 people (we managed to get nearly 80), it’s unfair on the candidates and the audience to expect them to shout. We hired a fantastic setup (and an operator!) through a community radio station. If you can find someone who’ll video the event, many people will appreciate that too.
A nice optional extra is to put together an online or printed guide to the election. We did both. Here’s our online guide, and here’s our printed handout. We were lucky in having a volunteer to do both, but it’s not a make-or-break thing.
For the hustings night itself, we needed a chairperson (it was yours truly, in our case) and some volunteers to provide refreshments. Someone needs to put together a list of questions for the candidates, and we let them have sight of these a week before the event. We decided that the hustings wasn’t a test of who could think on their feet the fastest, it was a chance for the candidates to give a considered pitch.
If each candidate gets just 2 minutes to answer a question, and you have four candidates, that probably means each question will last up to 10 minutes. If you have a one-hour event and want to allow the audience to put their own questions, as well as a summary from each candidate, you’ll only need about three or four questions.
What are the costs?
We had four areas of expenditure. The venue hire was £50 and the sound system was a further £50. We spent about £30 on our printed leaflets (online digital printers like Solopress can do these overnight, all you need is someone who’s proficient in laying out the document on a computer). Finally, we provided refreshments for everyone …but were lucky enough to have a generous local Co-op supermarket who helped us out with this.
You may find that people attending the event are more appreciative than you may think. We took the decision to ask – on the night – for a small, optional contribution on the way out, and covered our costs for the evening almost exactly.
Was it worth it?
Without doubt. Indeed, we believe that local councils should at least fund these events, if not organise them, as part of the election process. The feedback from people who came to the event was uniformly positive. But did it make a difference? We decided to find out, in the form of an exit poll where people dropped a dried bean into a jam-jar representing their thoughts. We didn’t ask who they were voting for – we asked if the event had changed their minds. The four jam-jars were marked “Knew who I was going to vote for and haven’t changed my mind”; “Knew who I was going to vote for and have changed my mind”; “Didn’t know who I was going to vote for but now do”; and “Didn’t know who I was going to vote and still don’t”.
About 50% of responders indicated that they were “fairly certain of who they’d vote for beforehand, and they hadn’t changed their mind” (although bear in mind this will have included the sprinkling of existing councillors and party activists present). More interestingly, 25% said they “hadn’t known who to vote for but now did”, and a further 20% said they’d “changed their mind based on the candidates’ performance at the event”. That was the best news of all.
What does a hustings event look like?
For this, I point you towards the write-up of the evening on my local blog. This gives links to the various videos of the evening, but if you’d just like to get a flavour of how it worked, here’s the opening statement from the first candidate.
On the night, we were as encouraging and courteous as possible to the candidates. It was always quite possible that some of them had never spoken in public before. We wanted to help them present their case as clearly as possible to the audience. We hope we achieved that.
Summary and Organisational Timeline
6 to 8 weeks before the election:
Initial planning. Set a date for the event about 1-2 weeks before the election, book a venue and a sound system if necessary. Discuss costs and funding. Start to organise volunteers for a chairperson, and (if they’re required) someone to video the event, someone to produce a leaflet and someone to provide and manage refreshments. Discuss publicity: local newsletters, websites, newspapers, radio; Facebook and Twitter opportunities; posters; schools and colleges; residents associations and anyone with a mailing list! Get contact details of local political parties, and collect literature from candidates (it contains their contact details!). Find out from the council the date and time when the official list of candidates will be published, and where you’ll be able to find it.
4 weeks before the election (after nomination closing day):
Get the official list of candidates from the council. Contact candidates with details of the event. Get confirmation from each that they’ve received the details. Finalise the questions to be asked. Get information from the candidates if you’re creating any printed or online guide to the election, including photographs if required. Launch the event publicity campaign! Ensure local parties publicise to their members. Prepare door-to-door leaflet drop if part of publicity plan.
1 week before the Hustings event:
Contact candidates with details of the questions to be asked. Produce any printed or online guide to the election. Confirm availability of venue, video person, sound system, refreshments. Prepare signs etc for the event, and name cards for the candidates and chairperson.
Best of luck!
I’m writing this in the aftermath of the EU membership referendum, and the result is still very raw. I’m probably not alone around here in having almost all of my friends, colleagues and neighbours having voted ‘remain’, and not having been exposed to whatever it is which drove people to vote the other way. In both Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire, the areas which my house flip-flops for different elections, the sentiment was clear:
At some stage in the months to come, MPs are going to be asked to vote on legislation to allow the UK to leave the EU. How should they vote? In my opinion, the issue brings us to the fundamental question of who an MP represents. I want an MP who represents the views of their constituents, but I recognise that there are other views on this. Many, particularly on the left in my experience, believe that an MP represents the party to which they belong, and should always vote to support that party. They say that voters understand this when they vote for them. Others say that this is a representative democracy, and that we are simply electing someone to make the best judgement they can on each issue as it arises; they want an MP to vote with their conscience.
I believe that the people who voted ‘remain’ in the referendum do not expect their MP to automatically acquiesce to a national sentiment. SNP politicians who lost their referendum did not do so; they resolved to continue the fight, and were richly rewarded at the ballot box.
So how should our two local MPs, Daniel Zeichner (Labour, Cambridge) and Heidi Allen (Conservative, South Cambridgeshire) vote on legislation to allow the UK to leave the EU? Well, it depends on which factors they see as the most important. Here’s a table which sets out what they have to consider:
|Stated personal conviction||Remain||Remain|
|National party policy pre-referendum||Remain||Remain|
|National party policy post-referendum||Remain (presumably)||Unknown|
|Local party member sentiment||Remain||Unknown (possibly Leave?)|
|Overall constituency vote||Remain||Remain|
|Own party voters in constituency sentiment||Remain (almost certainly)||Remain (probably*)|
|National voter sentiment||Leave||Leave|
It seems to me that both MPs, especially Mr Zeichner, should continue to fight for continued EU membership in any way that they can, unless they genuinely believe that a national referendum outweighs any local considerations. This includes voting against leaving the EU in parliament. Certainly that’s the path MPs in Scotland will be taking.
I put this to the MPs concerned via Twitter, and received an immediate response from Ms Allen, who has already been described as one of the best communicators in this parliament:
This, I have to say, is disappointing. I am not suggesting that parliament as a whole should refuse to vote through legislation on leaving the EU. Each MP should weigh up the importance of the considerations which I’ve outlined above, and I suspect that if they do so, the leave legislation will be passed. But in the case of our two local MPs, I would hope the fight will continue. If it does not, it’s because they believe that the responsibilities marked ‘Leave’ above outweigh those marked ‘Remain’. In the case of Ms Allen, it means that she considers the national result, and perhaps the views of local party members, to be more important than what her constituents want overall, and probably even what the majority of the 31,454 people who voted for her want.
And that’s a very serious statement from them about who they represent.
Addendum: It’s been pointed out to me that Ms Allen will be one of the very few Conservative MPs who have a mandate from their own constituency to continue the fight for EU membership. An even fewer number of Conservative MPs (I’m struggling to find any others, to be honest) will probably have a mandate from those who voted Conservative in their constituency. I suspect that people across the country will be looking to her not to waste that opportunity.
Addendum 2: Daniel Zeichner has now stated quite categorically that he will be voting to reflect the wishes of his constituents:
Let me be clear. When the vote on the EU comes before Parliament, my vote will reflect the overwhelming result in Cambridge – to #REMAIN.
— Daniel Zeichner (@DanielZeichner) June 27, 2016
*Do the maths; at the general election, the votes here in Ms Allen’s consituency were 50% Conservative, 10% UKIP, 40% Others. At the referendum, the vote was 40% ‘Leave’. If we assume that all 10% of the UKIP voters went for ‘Leave’, and 20% of the Labour, LibDem and Green voters joined them (forming another 8% of the total), then the 50% of voters who supported the Conservatives must have provided 22% to the ‘Leave’ vote and 28% to ‘Remain’. For the Conservative vote to have favoured ‘Leave’ would have required 90% or more of Labour, LibDem and Green voters to have voted ‘Remain’, which seems unlikely.