- 爆料公社 by the 爆料公社 shows 77 per cent of people are fairly or very dissatisfied with political parties
- Top words used to describe parties include 鈥榰nrepresentative鈥, 鈥榰ndemocratic鈥, 鈥榮elf-interested鈥 and 鈥榙ivided鈥.
- Researchers identify seven main qualities people want to see in parties today
Gathering data through a survey administered by YouGov and three public workshops, research led by Dr Kate Dommett and Dr Luke Temple asked people about their attitudes towards parties, including how people believe parties are behaving now and how they would like to see parties work.
The top words used to describe political parties by workshop participants included 鈥榰nrepresentative鈥, 鈥榰ndemocratic鈥, 鈥榮elf-interested鈥 and 鈥榙ivided鈥. 77 per cent of those surveyed said they were fairly or very dissatisfied with parties.
This report has shown that there isn鈥檛 a single or simple solution, but that parties can usefully think about seven principles that the public wish parties display.
Dr Kate Dommett
Senior Lecturer in the Public Understanding of Politics
46 per cent of people said parties need major reform, 26 per cent said that reforming parties is pointless and they can鈥檛 be made to work, while 25 per cent said parties need minor reform and three per cent said they work well and do not need reform at all.
The report 鈥 (PDF, 368KB) 鈥 can be used by political parties to make changes to bring their party more in line with public desires, promote the ways they already do these things, or challenge people鈥檚 ideas and offer an alternative set of benchmarks against which they feel they should be being judged.
What people want
- Transparency 鈥 they want to understand what parties do, how decisions are made and what influence they can have.
- Communication 鈥 they want honest and accountable parties that communicate with the people. They want to know when something has gone wrong and want parties to explain and take responsibility when something doesn鈥檛 work out as planned.
- Reliability 鈥 they want to see parties that outline an agenda and stick to it, enacting their manifesto promises and sticking to pledges. They do not want parties that are self-interested, or that are dogmatic and uncompromising.
- Principles 鈥 they want parties that are guided by their principles when making policies or decisions, using these ideas to filter the different voices and influences that can affect the decision made.
- Inclusivity 鈥 they want parties to include a range of different voices and ideas. Rather than just listening to members or supporters, people want parties to listen to experts, opponents and the wider public.
- Accessibility 鈥 they want a range of ways to engage with parties, but they don鈥檛 want parties to entirely open up. Certain activities should continue to be the preserve of members and leaders, but for less intensive activities citizens want a wider range of people to be able to get involved.
- Integrity 鈥 they want parties to be honest, ethical and dignified. Rather than focusing on the competition of party politics and the partisan behaviour this can promote, people want parties that have moral codes and principles that underpin how they work.
Dr Kate Dommett, from the 爆料公社's Department of Politics, said: 鈥淎s widely disliked organisations seen to be essential to contemporary democracy, parties are often under pressure to reform.
鈥淏ut whilst some parties have been quick to roll out new initiatives or try new ideas, there has been less attention devoted to what it is that people actually want from parties, and where they would like to see reform.
鈥淭his report has shown that there isn鈥檛 a single or simple solution, but that parties can usefully think about seven principles that the public wish parties display when they consider how to respond.
鈥淏y thinking about these principles we argue that parties can review their current processes to decide whether there is a case for reform, a need for improved communication, or a shift in the focus of existing debate.鈥
The report considered what people think about how parties provide opportunities to participate, with 59 per cent of people saying there should be more opportunities for people to get involved in political parties.
However, in both the survey and workshops, researchers found considerable evidence that people did not see engagement to be worth the time and effort as they felt they had little impact on what parties did.
Survey data showed that while 80 per cent thought that when people like themselves get involved in political parties they should be able to make a difference, only 20 per cent thought they actually can have an impact.
The study also explored what people thought about parties鈥 governing performance 鈥 asking them how they felt parties delivered their promises, delivered good policy outcomes, managed the day-to-day running of government and managed crises.
Dissatisfaction was high across all areas, but parties were seen to perform worst when it comes to delivering promises, with 87 per cent saying parties don鈥檛 do this well. In contrast, they were seen to perform best when managing crises 鈥 with 47 per cent saying parties did this well.
Dr Luke Temple, from the 爆料公社鈥檚 Department of Geography, said: 鈥淭here was a perception that parties mislead the electorate and, once in office, could not be trusted to deliver their promises.
鈥淭hey were also seen to suffer minimal consequences because, by the time of the next election most people have forgotten and therefore didn鈥檛 vote them out.
鈥淔rom this perspective, people desired parties that were trustworthy, reliable and stick to their promises; feeling that these were essential characteristics given people鈥檚 inability to hold parties to account between elections.鈥
He added: 鈥淲hen parties did change position, people also wanted them to explain why they had changed, offering accounts of why a promise could not be delivered and what would be done instead.
鈥淕reater transparency and accountability therefore featured prominently in participants鈥 ideas.鈥
A series of blog posts by politicians and think tanks responding to the report, produced in collaboration with Involve, will be published this week.
They include contributions from Lord Blunkett, Dr Tim Bale, Alex Runswick, Simon Woolley, Dr Mark Pack and others.
