Inclusive Parliament coalition's statement

Tuesday 4th March 2025 - 11:54

Logos for the organisations making up the Inclusive Parliament coalition

In February, a committee tasked with modernising procedures in the House of Commons announced its next steps. A coalition of over 30 organisations, including STAMMA, gives its response…

Last December we joined forces with the Royal College of Speech & Language Therapists to assemble a coalition with one aim in mind. That aim was to highlight the barriers people with communication differences can face in the House of Commons with the way it works (see our article 'Coalition calls for an inclusive Parliament').

Made up of over 30 organisations, the Inclusive Parliament coalition drew up a joint submission to the House of Commons' Modernisation Committee, who invited input to help it review and improve the way debates are conducted within Parliament. They wanted to find out what they should prioritise.

In its submission to the Committee, the coalition highlighted how the Commons' current standards, culture and working practices, and parliamentary procedures, can act as barriers to people with communication disability, difficulty, or difference from engaging with Parliament. It highlighted how this can exclude people from taking part in parliamentary debates or engaging with the political process. In its evidence, the coalition highlighted what it thinks needs to happen.

It wasn't alone in giving recommendations — thank you to everyone who submitted their own after we put the plea out last December.

The Modernisation Committee issued a memorandum on its next steps at the end of February, in which it addressed broadly the need to improve accessibility. Read the relevant passage in full below.

Title

What the memorandum says on improving accessibility

The memorandum states:

Improving accessibility for MPs, staff and the public

This package of work will look at the accessibility of the physical parliamentary estate, and of House of Commons procedure and practices, and, more broadly, the accessibility of parliamentary language and information. It will consider the work that is already under way, as well as what more can be done.

Multiple responses to the call for views discussed the accessibility of the House of Commons to MPs, staff and visitors with disabilities, with this emerging as a particularly strong theme. Among internal parliamentary stakeholders, there was a view that the process for requesting reasonable adjustments could be improved. Responses that mentioned improving accessibility emphasised that this was a crucial part of ensuring that the House of Commons was inclusive and representative.

Some argued that parliamentary language and information about how the House of Commons works could be made more accessible, particularly in relation to the legislative process. To narrow the gap between the House of Commons and the public, it is important that the way the House works is easier to understand. It is also crucial that the tone of debates, and behaviour in debates, reflects what the public expects of its elected MPs.

Response

The coalition has released a statement in response saying that there's much to welcome in the next steps: "We were pleased to see that this echoed much of our evidence on improving accessibility for MPs, staff and the public," says the coalition.

However, they continued: "While this is welcome, there is more to do. We are disappointed that there is not a greater focus on the procedures of parliamentary debates, as these can prevent or limit some MPs with communication disabilities from taking an active part in debates".

What next?

In its statement, the coalition said: "We look forward to seeing how the Committee takes forward this piece of work and hope it will work with the coalition on improved accessibility to members, staff, and the public, with communication disability, difficulty, or difference. As part of that, we hope that the Committee will have a particular focus on how parliamentary procedures can be made accessible to MPs with communication disability, difficulty, or difference, rather than exclude them. Although out of the scope of the Commons' Committee, work is needed in the House of Lords on this too".

For more information, please contact peter.just@rcslt.org or elissa.cregan@rcslt.org at the Royal College of Speech & Language therapists.