:00:13. > :00:19.Good morning, everyone. On behalf of the Hansard Society, thank you for
:00:20. > :00:24.coming. After months of crunching the data, analysing the numbers,
:00:25. > :00:26.writing the report, this was not quite the circumstances we imagined
:00:27. > :00:32.for our launch of this morning but here we are. Can I add a thank you
:00:33. > :00:39.to Tim and Alex. Ding in a very late notice to speak on our panel,
:00:40. > :00:43.because those of you familiar with the society will know that since
:00:44. > :00:46.1944 when we started we have had a reputation strongly held for
:00:47. > :00:50.nonpartisanship and with the heat of the campaign now across the airwaves
:00:51. > :00:58.we decided it was not possible to have an unbalanced political panel
:00:59. > :01:01.of MPs so I'm grateful to Tim and Alex for standing into the bridge. I
:01:02. > :01:04.can see a number of familiar faces in the audience but for those of you
:01:05. > :01:07.who are perhaps a little less familiar with the study, I'm going
:01:08. > :01:15.to begin by outlining a bit of the background. It is, as Penny alluded
:01:16. > :01:18.to, a the Times series study providing an annual benchmark on
:01:19. > :01:24.political engagement in Great Britain. It is essentially a health
:01:25. > :01:28.check on the state of art democracy, attitudes to the political process
:01:29. > :01:32.with a particular focus on Parliament and MPs. Each audit is
:01:33. > :01:37.based on an annual opinion poll survey taken in this case in
:01:38. > :01:42.December and January by Ipsos MORI with a representative quota sample
:01:43. > :01:45.of the public of adults aged 18 plus in Great Britain and the survey is
:01:46. > :01:49.conducted face-to-face in urine's homes so I would like to thank Ipsos
:01:50. > :01:56.MORI for the work that they have done to get us into safe harbour
:01:57. > :02:00.today over the last few weeks. I always stress when I speak at events
:02:01. > :02:04.about the audit that the results are a snapshot not a prediction of
:02:05. > :02:09.engagement in politics at a particular moment in time and the
:02:10. > :02:16.value of the audit is the trend data as much as the one-off results that
:02:17. > :02:21.we see each year. For example, we've been looking at trend data around
:02:22. > :02:25.general elections, generally spaced five years apart, so as you can
:02:26. > :02:29.imagine an election after two years really destroys our trends and our
:02:30. > :02:36.themes in the study. But nonetheless, we will be looking back
:02:37. > :02:38.at some general election trends in today's results. Inevitably in the
:02:39. > :02:42.time allowed I'm only going to be able to touch on some of the
:02:43. > :02:45.headline numbers. There was a lot more detail in the report and you
:02:46. > :02:50.will be getting a digital copy of it and a link to download shortly in
:02:51. > :02:56.your inbox after this event so you can read all the detail there. So,
:02:57. > :02:59.what do we look at? Well, each year we look at core indicators of
:03:00. > :03:03.engagement, what we call the building blocks of engagement, that
:03:04. > :03:09.we know our vital facets of how the public engage. They are grouped in
:03:10. > :03:12.four areas - knowledge and interest, participation, efficacy and
:03:13. > :03:16.satisfaction, influence and involvement. The core integrator
:03:17. > :03:21.questions are supplemented by a range of questions about Parliament,
:03:22. > :03:24.about MPs, people's perception of the institution of our democracy and
:03:25. > :03:29.their representatives and from year to year we add in some topical
:03:30. > :03:32.questions on topical themes of the moment and sometimes revisit these
:03:33. > :03:38.on two or three-year cycles and the report sets out in much greater
:03:39. > :03:44.detail the background for these indicators and why they have been
:03:45. > :03:47.chosen, dating back to 2004. So, what are we actually covering in the
:03:48. > :03:54.report? Well, there are three key themes. First is an EU referendum
:03:55. > :03:57.effect. Can we see whether there has been a positive response from the
:03:58. > :04:01.public in terms of political attitudes after the referendum, the
:04:02. > :04:07.kind that those of you who are familiar with the audit will know we
:04:08. > :04:11.saw two years ago after the audit following the Scottish independence
:04:12. > :04:14.referendum, when engagement levels in Scotland were boosted
:04:15. > :04:18.significantly. Two years later we can see in Scotland but engagement
:04:19. > :04:22.levels started to subside but on many indicators they are still well
:04:23. > :04:24.above the national average. So the question is, when we are putting the
:04:25. > :04:32.survey into the field, will the referendum have had a similar effect
:04:33. > :04:34.across Great Britain? Second is perceptions of Parliament, what are
:04:35. > :04:38.the public think about the core institution of our democracy and
:04:39. > :04:43.their elected representatives? And thirdly, going back to where we
:04:44. > :04:47.began, the vote. Has the experience of that June vote last summer
:04:48. > :04:52.changed people's attitudes to referendums, and what do they think
:04:53. > :04:57.of experts? As we go through the headlines, I ask you to their two
:04:58. > :05:06.thoughts in mind. How attitudes to politics changed and how political
:05:07. > :05:10.behaviour changes. And if any of you have read by Times Red Box article
:05:11. > :05:13.this morning, you will know the answer to that already. John and I
:05:14. > :05:16.are going to divide the presentation on the themes between us so I'm
:05:17. > :05:20.going to do the first half and then hand over. Firstly, before getting
:05:21. > :05:25.into these three themes, given that we are facing an election, I wanted
:05:26. > :05:31.to just look at two key elements of the data that are pertinent to the
:05:32. > :05:36.electoral context. Certainty to vote - how certain to the public say they
:05:37. > :05:39.are to vote in the event of an immediate general election? Bear in
:05:40. > :05:43.mind, this question was asked some month ago before anybody had any
:05:44. > :05:48.idea we would be facing an election, and it's a question that we've asked
:05:49. > :05:52.for each of the audit dating back to 2004. As you can see, 59% said they
:05:53. > :05:57.were absolutely certain to vote in the event of an immediate election,
:05:58. > :06:03.the same as last year, the high watermark across the 14 years of the
:06:04. > :06:06.audit. A further 16% on top of that said they were likely to vote.
:06:07. > :06:12.Forgetting about the election in front of us for the moment, as you
:06:13. > :06:18.can see on the slide, audits four and mine are posed general election
:06:19. > :06:23.themes, and marks the same stage of the political cycle following the
:06:24. > :06:27.2005 and 2010 general elections, the same stage as we are at now after
:06:28. > :06:32.the 2015 election and, as you can see, certainty to vote was sustained
:06:33. > :06:40.in 2007 but at a lower level, while it fell considerably in 2012 and you
:06:41. > :06:42.can see the drop-off in the 2012 numbers in the years of Coalition
:06:43. > :06:46.government. As ever, older members of the public are more likely to say
:06:47. > :06:54.they are certain to vote than younger ones. 75% of the over 55s
:06:55. > :06:57.said they are certain, 44% of 18 to 34-year-olds. To stress again, this
:06:58. > :07:01.is not a prediction, it is a snapshot of what people said they
:07:02. > :07:05.would do some months ago and we know that election turnout was higher
:07:06. > :07:08.last time. But I think the fact that certainty to vote is holding up and
:07:09. > :07:13.is at the highest level we've recorded in the series has got to be
:07:14. > :07:20.a good portent for June eight. What about political parties? Well, in
:07:21. > :07:23.last year's audit, we saw a really quite significant increase in the
:07:24. > :07:29.number of people claiming to be a strong supporter of a political
:07:30. > :07:33.party. Rose by 11 points to 41%. This year, that has gone and we are
:07:34. > :07:38.back down to much more accustomed levels of support with around three
:07:39. > :07:42.in ten people saying they are a strong supporter of the party. We
:07:43. > :07:45.thought the increase last year might have been a post-election hangover
:07:46. > :07:50.and these results seem to bear that out. The growth in support last
:07:51. > :07:56.year, interestingly, was particularly pronounced among 18 to
:07:57. > :08:01.24-year-olds. At increased last year from 13% 238% and has settled back
:08:02. > :08:09.now to 22%, still higher than two years ago but down on last year. So,
:08:10. > :08:14.has there been a referendum if that? Has there been a positive impact as
:08:15. > :08:18.a result of the referendum, of the kind we witnessed in Scotland?
:08:19. > :08:22.Electoral participation is not the only indicator of the health of our
:08:23. > :08:26.democracy. Turnout, as we know, in last year's referendum was high,
:08:27. > :08:31.millions of pounds spent campaigning, the question is, did it
:08:32. > :08:34.have any impact? This slide shows six of our key indicators of
:08:35. > :08:41.engagement that we look at every year and compares the results to
:08:42. > :08:44.last year. As you can see, whilst in Scotland last time we saw big
:08:45. > :08:50.increases apart from satisfaction with government, but on this slide,
:08:51. > :08:53.as you can see, for Britain nationwide public attitudes have
:08:54. > :08:58.either remain stable or have fallen back and, in most instances, they've
:08:59. > :09:01.fallen back to the kind of pre-general election levels that we
:09:02. > :09:08.saw after the post-election boost that we saw in last year's results.
:09:09. > :09:12.So you see faint interest in our knowledge of politics has declined,
:09:13. > :09:15.perceived knowledge of Parliament also down. Satisfaction with the
:09:16. > :09:19.system of governing Britain has barely changed and remains low at
:09:20. > :09:25.31%, as does people's sense of the efficacy of their own involvement in
:09:26. > :09:28.politics. So really, these are adults -- these results suggest
:09:29. > :09:33.there has been no positive effect as a result of the poll last summer.
:09:34. > :09:37.The result that I find particularly interesting is that the EU
:09:38. > :09:41.referendum was one of the most consequential acts of
:09:42. > :09:45.decision-making in this country. Despite the seismic impact of the
:09:46. > :09:48.result, the proportion of people who feel they have influence over
:09:49. > :09:53.national decision-making has increased by just three points since
:09:54. > :09:56.last year and now stands at 16%. Are given the referendum result, we
:09:57. > :09:59.might have expected that those who voted Leave might feel quite
:10:00. > :10:04.influential in national decision-making as a result of what
:10:05. > :10:11.has happened but, as you can see, sense of influence is in line with
:10:12. > :10:15.the national average. We tend to concentrate on the statistically
:10:16. > :10:17.significant findings, these are not statistically significant but in
:10:18. > :10:27.that I think is where the interest lies. As in previous audits,
:10:28. > :10:31.people's low sense of their personal political influence continues to be
:10:32. > :10:35.outstripped by their desire to be involved in politics, particularly
:10:36. > :10:38.at the local level. This graph shows the difference, the gap between the
:10:39. > :10:44.public's desire for involvement in politics locally and nationally, the
:10:45. > :10:47.top is at the top of the chart, the two lines at the top their perceived
:10:48. > :10:53.sense of influence on decision-making. Only 16% feel they
:10:54. > :10:59.have some influence over decision-making nationally but 41%
:11:00. > :11:01.would like to be involved in decision-making and more people,
:11:02. > :11:07.46%, would like to be involved in local decisions. But just 23%
:11:08. > :11:14.currently feel that they have some influence at a local level. Overall,
:11:15. > :11:17.there is a desire to get involved, particularly at the local level,
:11:18. > :11:24.that remains untapped, and the referendum hasn't made any
:11:25. > :11:29.difference to that at all. Now, turning to Parliament, in the last
:11:30. > :11:33.few years we've asked a battery of questions about public perceptions
:11:34. > :11:37.of Parliament's role and work and the standout result this year, as in
:11:38. > :11:42.previous years, is that a very significant majority of the public
:11:43. > :11:46.think that Parliament is essential to our democracy. 73% say that, the
:11:47. > :11:50.same as last year. Seven points higher than at the same stage of the
:11:51. > :11:55.previous post 2010 general election cycle that we looked at in audit
:11:56. > :12:00.nine. Beyond that, as you can see from the chart, the public attitudes
:12:01. > :12:04.are largely unchanged. Sustaining the significant increase in
:12:05. > :12:07.improvements we saw on these questions last year. The public
:12:08. > :12:13.clearly value the institution but there are two points of caution in
:12:14. > :12:18.the data. The first is that overall satisfaction with the way Parliament
:12:19. > :12:22.works has declined to 30% and now stands six points lower than it did
:12:23. > :12:25.at the start of the audit series and secondly, the public's perceived
:12:26. > :12:30.knowledge of Parliament has also declined by seven points to 45% but
:12:31. > :12:35.is higher than it was at the same stage of the political cycle after
:12:36. > :12:38.the 2005 and 2010 elections, and knowledge levels are 12 points
:12:39. > :12:45.higher than they were at the start of the audit in 2004. We've also
:12:46. > :12:50.introduced a battery of new questions about Parliament, to
:12:51. > :12:53.explore perceptions of it in relation to six core functions that
:12:54. > :12:57.are identified down the left-hand side of the slide. We ask how
:12:58. > :13:01.important these functions are two people and to what extent they think
:13:02. > :13:06.Parliament has done a good job in relation to each of them in the last
:13:07. > :13:10.few years. Unsurprisingly, a majority of the public think it is
:13:11. > :13:14.important that Parliament performs each of these responsibilities
:13:15. > :13:18.tested. At least eight in ten people say that they are important to them.
:13:19. > :13:24.Checking the way public money is raised and spent by the government
:13:25. > :13:29.tops the table, 90% say it is important, and of that nearly two
:13:30. > :13:33.thirds rate it as very important. Yet despite ranking all those
:13:34. > :13:37.functions very highly, only four in ten people believe that Parliament
:13:38. > :13:42.has done a good job in carrying out those responsibilities in the last
:13:43. > :13:45.few years. The institution's perceived strengths are debating
:13:46. > :13:49.issues of public concern, scrutinising the government and
:13:50. > :13:52.amending legislation but there is clearly significant scope for
:13:53. > :13:57.improvement across all areas, as you can see there. At this point, I'm
:13:58. > :14:03.going to hand over to Joel, who is going to talk about how MPs should
:14:04. > :14:08.spend their time, of great interest to all those candidates who may well
:14:09. > :14:11.be coming back, and he will wrap up the presentation.
:14:12. > :14:21.Thanks, good morning. I am going to kick off... I don't know if there
:14:22. > :14:26.are any MPs in the house. At the audit we asked a question and and we
:14:27. > :14:29.found the public believe MPs to be the most effective group in
:14:30. > :14:34.holding... To account. What MPs do and how they spend their time is key
:14:35. > :14:37.in carrying out their responsibilities. To explore this
:14:38. > :14:44.issue further, we repeated the question we last asked in 2010 in
:14:45. > :14:47.audit seven following the MPs' inspectors crisis to gauge what the
:14:48. > :14:51.public thought were the most important ways MPs should spend
:14:52. > :14:57.their time. Selecting from a list of 11 possible options. The results
:14:58. > :15:00.suggest a mixed picture. Representing the views of local
:15:01. > :15:04.people remains today as in audit seven the most important way that
:15:05. > :15:09.the people think MPs should spend their time. Just under half the
:15:10. > :15:15.public, around 47%, say this. That is 12 points ahead of the next
:15:16. > :15:18.ranked priority. Representing the UK's national interest remains the
:15:19. > :15:23.second ranked priority but fewer people prioritised this today. 41
:15:24. > :15:28.said this was important to them in audit seven but just 35% say the
:15:29. > :15:32.same now. Holding the Government to account is third on the list with
:15:33. > :15:36.just over a third of the public choosing this option. 34%,
:15:37. > :15:45.marginally more than chose it in audit seven. Referring back to the
:15:46. > :15:49.earlier slide, fewer people, despite attaching importance to the need to
:15:50. > :15:54.debate issues of public concern, fewer people today think that
:15:55. > :15:58.debating important issues in the House of Commons is an important way
:15:59. > :16:07.for MPs to spend their time, just under a third, 32% say so compared
:16:08. > :16:10.to about 37% seven years ago. Given the spotlight thrown on Parliament
:16:11. > :16:13.during and after the referendum, we were interested in whether or not
:16:14. > :16:17.there would have been any change in the way that the public has engaged
:16:18. > :16:21.with the institution this year. In the last audit we explored in what
:16:22. > :16:25.ways, if any, the public had engaged with Parliament in the previous 12
:16:26. > :16:29.months and we provided a list of eight possible ways they could have
:16:30. > :16:32.done so. We also asked which options they would be prepared to take if
:16:33. > :16:35.they felt strongly about an issue and the results are quite
:16:36. > :16:38.encouraging this ship. More than half the public say they have
:16:39. > :16:43.engaged with Parliament in the last 12 months and that is a ten point
:16:44. > :16:46.increase from audit 13. The most significant areas of growth can be
:16:47. > :16:51.found in the number of people who say they have watched or listened to
:16:52. > :16:57.a Parliamentary debate or committee meeting. This has risen from 31% to
:16:58. > :17:02.39%. Those who have watched a Parliamentary event or listened to
:17:03. > :17:06.events in the future as risen by up to 40% as well. The number of people
:17:07. > :17:13.who say they have signed an e-petition is up seven points, to
:17:14. > :17:17.22%. 40% say they would do so in the future if they felt strongly about
:17:18. > :17:18.an issue. Since the new Parliamentary petition system was
:17:19. > :17:23.launched after the last general election, there has been 31 million
:17:24. > :17:27.signatures from 14 million different e-mail addresses so we have to go
:17:28. > :17:30.back to the 19th century to find a time when petitioning Parliament on
:17:31. > :17:36.issues of concern was such a common event nationwide. There has also
:17:37. > :17:39.been an improvement in the number of people visiting Parliament's website
:17:40. > :17:45.and information materials, it has risen to 12%. Turning to what people
:17:46. > :17:50.would be prepared to do if they felt strongly about an issue, contacting
:17:51. > :17:56.an MP or appear for their views is by far the most popular option.
:17:57. > :18:03.Pretty much the same as last year, which was 51%. Like many Parliament
:18:04. > :18:07.to run the world Westminster faces importance and value on its public
:18:08. > :18:11.engagement work, providing a range of mechanisms to convey impartial
:18:12. > :18:15.information to the public about how our democracy works. During the
:18:16. > :18:19.referendum campaign, impartial briefings from the library staff
:18:20. > :18:22.were a key resource used by campaigners and jealous. Not
:18:23. > :18:26.everyone can or want to come to Westminster, so how can Parliament
:18:27. > :18:30.best reach the public to provide this information to those who want
:18:31. > :18:33.it? We asked the public to select from a list of six options. The ways
:18:34. > :18:37.in which they would most to receive this information. The top two
:18:38. > :18:42.choices reflect the dominance of digital as a means of reaching the
:18:43. > :18:44.public. Four in ten people, 40%, choose material that can be
:18:45. > :18:52.downloaded from the Parliament website and just over a third chose
:18:53. > :18:57.information via social media. Vying the social media was hosting school
:18:58. > :19:00.visits. Just over a quarter selected local workshops about how Parliament
:19:01. > :19:06.works. Just under a quarter would encourage the public to visit
:19:07. > :19:10.Parliament. Focusing on the most disengaged groups, the top three
:19:11. > :19:15.options for those aged 18 to 34, those in social group D, E, and
:19:16. > :19:18.BMEs, providing material for for downloading from the website,
:19:19. > :19:23.information on social media and hosting school visits to Parliament.
:19:24. > :19:27.Parliament has been experimenting with and growing its social media
:19:28. > :19:30.presence and a new education Centre which opened in 2016 will enable
:19:31. > :19:35.Parliament to increase the number of school pupils visiting Westminster
:19:36. > :19:40.from approximately 40,000 per year to around 100,000. Some improvements
:19:41. > :19:42.are under way to address two of the top rooty-mac for Parliament to
:19:43. > :19:49.reach out and disseminate information to the public. An
:19:50. > :19:54.element of this's orders was exploring attitudes to referendums
:19:55. > :19:58.in general. -- this year's audit. After four referendums in six years,
:19:59. > :20:02.to UK wide, one in Scotland and one in Wales, the public exhibit decline
:20:03. > :20:09.in support for more of this method of decision-making. A clear
:20:10. > :20:13.majority, three in five British adults or 61%, agree that important
:20:14. > :20:18.questions should be determined by referendums more often than they are
:20:19. > :20:21.today. However, this is significantly below levels of
:20:22. > :20:25.support for more referendums recorded in audits prior to the EU
:20:26. > :20:31.referendum. When this was asked last year, and when the past it again in
:20:32. > :20:37.2012, support for referendums stood at 76% and 72% respectively. It
:20:38. > :20:47.decline in 15 -- of 15 percentage points. Looking at party affinity,
:20:48. > :20:51.those who are strong supporters of Ukip are most likely to support the
:20:52. > :20:55.use of referendums to determine important questions. That is nearly
:20:56. > :21:01.nine in ten Ukip supporters. In contrast, the supporters of the most
:21:02. > :21:05.avowedly pro-EU party, the Lib Dems, are least likely to support the use
:21:06. > :21:09.of referendums as a decision-making mechanism, only 40% of the
:21:10. > :21:13.supporters do so. Younger people are also more likely to support
:21:14. > :21:16.referendums, two thirds of 18 to 34-year-olds agreed that referendums
:21:17. > :21:21.should be used to determine important questions more often than
:21:22. > :21:29.today. This contrasts with 54% of those aged 55 and above who would
:21:30. > :21:33.say the same. In the aftermath of the EU referendum when questions
:21:34. > :21:36.were raised about how government and Parliament will take the decision
:21:37. > :21:39.forward, we decided to test public attitudes to a range of
:21:40. > :21:43.decision-making mechanisms and across several different policy
:21:44. > :21:48.scenarios. We asked which mechanism people thought would work best to
:21:49. > :21:51.produce a decision in Britain's best interests, government taking the
:21:52. > :21:53.decision without a vote in Parliament, a Parliamentary vote,
:21:54. > :21:58.local government deciding for their own area, or the public deciding
:21:59. > :22:03.through a referendum, for example. Each option was put across five
:22:04. > :22:07.different policy areas, covering national and local issues, and
:22:08. > :22:12.constitutional and ethical matters. We suggested a method for electing
:22:13. > :22:15.MPs, financial matters relating to the NHS, fracking, assisted dying
:22:16. > :22:23.and the future relationship with the EU. Overall, public opinion was
:22:24. > :22:27.split. No decision-making attracts the majority support for any policy
:22:28. > :22:31.scenario. But decisions by the public through referendum were the
:22:32. > :22:35.most popular. Some patterns of preference can be discerned. On the
:22:36. > :22:40.constitutional and ethical questions, four in ten of the public
:22:41. > :22:44.selected themselves via referendum as the best way to take a decision
:22:45. > :22:47.in the country's best interests. Significantly ahead of the decision
:22:48. > :22:53.being taken by government or Parliament. In relation to deciding
:22:54. > :22:57.how money -- how much money the government should spend on the NHS,
:22:58. > :23:03.the public think Parliament would be better placed to decide. Almost as
:23:04. > :23:06.many people thought that local government should decide as thought
:23:07. > :23:09.the public should do so. While the decision by the public were still
:23:10. > :23:13.the most popular option to address the issue of fracking, here support
:23:14. > :23:16.was lower in relation to the constitutional and ethical
:23:17. > :23:20.questions. Only three in ten option -- opted for a decision by the
:23:21. > :23:25.public. It was on this question that a decision by the local government
:23:26. > :23:34.supported -- attracted more support. One finding in this year's results
:23:35. > :23:38.was that although more people in the life of this audit claimed to be
:23:39. > :23:43.more knowledgeable about the EU, 42%, there are still barely more
:23:44. > :23:46.than four in ten people, this indicates it has increased by only
:23:47. > :23:49.five points in the year despite the referendum. As in ordered 13, the
:23:50. > :23:55.most affluent groups are among the most likely to say they feel
:23:56. > :23:57.knowledgeable about the EU. Those with graduate-level education are
:23:58. > :24:02.more than twice as likely to feel knowledgeable as those with none at
:24:03. > :24:05.all. Those living in London perceive themselves to be quite knowledgeable
:24:06. > :24:12.about the EU and 55% significantly above national average. Scots, 49%,
:24:13. > :24:15.and those living in the south of England, 47% claim to be
:24:16. > :24:18.knowledgeable, in contrast to the Welsh and those living in the North
:24:19. > :24:22.of England whose knowledge levels are significantly below the national
:24:23. > :24:31.average. The Lib Dems are most apt to say they feel knowledgeable about
:24:32. > :24:34.the EU. So, although experts were widely criticised by prominent Leave
:24:35. > :24:38.campaigners during the referendum campaign, many of the public found
:24:39. > :24:41.them to be among the most trusted and useful sources of information
:24:42. > :24:47.about the referendum. Second only to TV and radio news programmes.
:24:48. > :24:49.Considerably ahead of the official Leave and Remain campaigns. TV and
:24:50. > :24:56.radio news programmes were considered among the most useful by
:24:57. > :25:00.37% of the public, and most trustworthy by 34%, far in front of
:25:01. > :25:03.any other source of information. No other source attracted the support
:25:04. > :25:09.of more than two in ten members of the public. Experts were valued by
:25:10. > :25:12.20% of the most useful source and 21% found them most trustworthy.
:25:13. > :25:19.Newspapers were viewed as useful to 80% of the public and 16% as a
:25:20. > :25:22.trusted source. -- 18%. Online sources of information were
:25:23. > :25:28.considered most useful and trustworthy by only one in ten of
:25:29. > :25:41.the population. The Leave campaign focused a lot of digital targeting
:25:42. > :25:44.of the messages. The official campaigns only had a limited impact
:25:45. > :25:47.on public in terms of providing information. Nearly one in ten said
:25:48. > :25:52.they were the most useful or trustworthy source. The significant
:25:53. > :25:55.effort put in by the campaigns to highlight the support of the
:25:56. > :25:59.business sector may also have been a wasted effort. The more than 5% fund
:26:00. > :26:05.businesses to be a useful source of information. -- no more than 5%
:26:06. > :26:09.found. 70% of the public found none of the options listed to be a
:26:10. > :26:15.trustworthy source of information. 13% found none of them to be useful.
:26:16. > :26:22.-- 70%. Finally, the last slide, an interesting question. Turning back
:26:23. > :26:26.to support for referendums, support for more referendums than today is
:26:27. > :26:30.lowest in Scotland compared to other parts of Britain. Indicating perhaps
:26:31. > :26:33.a level of referendum fatigue following to referendums in less
:26:34. > :26:38.than two years. A development that may not bode well for the prospects
:26:39. > :26:44.of a second independence referendum. Support for more referendums among
:26:45. > :26:49.Scots has declined 55%, a drop of 19 percentage points from the 74%
:26:50. > :26:52.recorded in the last audit wave. Net support for referendums in Scotland
:26:53. > :26:58.now stands at only plus 11 compared to the national average of plus 26%
:26:59. > :27:01.and the plus 50% recorded in Scotland in the last audit. On that,
:27:02. > :27:15.that is the presentation. Thank you very much. I think the observations
:27:16. > :27:23.I would make that the EU referendum does not seem to have provided a
:27:24. > :27:29.much engagement as expected. Despite the fact they delivered a seismic
:27:30. > :27:32.shock to the UK and the EU and to politicians. And whilst the public
:27:33. > :27:37.still feel referendums are important, some people have gone off
:27:38. > :27:41.them as a mechanism for making decisions. If the liquor perceptions
:27:42. > :27:48.of Parliament, they are definitely not where we expect them to be in
:27:49. > :27:51.terms of public engagement. If you look at actual behaviour, signing
:27:52. > :27:55.petitions and watching and listening to debates, perhaps experts and
:27:56. > :28:02.media have had something of a bad press. So, I turn now to a couple of
:28:03. > :28:11.experts. First, Tim, what do you make of this? Thank you for inviting
:28:12. > :28:14.me, and also thank you to the Hansard Society and the House of
:28:15. > :28:20.Commons for funding what is an incredible resource, not least
:28:21. > :28:24.because as we have heard, it allows us to track trends over time. It is
:28:25. > :28:28.also worth saying it is an incredibly attractively produced
:28:29. > :28:37.resource and certainly it is a lesson for all us experts and
:28:38. > :28:40.academics on how to not only produce numbers, but to communicate them
:28:41. > :28:45.very clearly. And I would also like to say I am impressed by the gender
:28:46. > :28:48.balanced panel, but also the gender balanced audience. One of the
:28:49. > :28:56.advantages of sitting on a podium is that you can count the audience and
:28:57. > :29:01.it is 52% men, 48% women! A spooky percentage, after the referendum.
:29:02. > :29:07.I want to talk more about the present on the future than the past,
:29:08. > :29:09.so I'm not going to say very much about the referendum because I think
:29:10. > :29:15.others will talk more about that, other than to say something about
:29:16. > :29:22.differences in perceptions of their usefulness. It is, I think, very
:29:23. > :29:27.interesting that when you ask people about whether the referendum --
:29:28. > :29:31.whether referendums should be used more to decide important questions,
:29:32. > :29:35.they're a very significant differences, for example, between
:29:36. > :29:40.people who voted Remain and people who voted Leave. 74% of people who
:29:41. > :29:46.voted Leave would like more use of referendums, 47% of people who voted
:29:47. > :29:52.Remain would like to see the same. 88% Ukip supporters would like to
:29:53. > :29:55.see more referendums, 42% of Liberal Democrat supporters would like to
:29:56. > :30:03.see more referendums. You can dismiss these differences in as
:30:04. > :30:06.simply a product of being a bad loser, if you like. But
:30:07. > :30:13.interestingly, you don't get such big differences when it comes to
:30:14. > :30:16.representative general elections. In general elections, the losers accept
:30:17. > :30:20.acceptably, generally speaking, and don't necessarily see any problem
:30:21. > :30:24.with the mechanism, ie going to the ballot box and choosing constituency
:30:25. > :30:31.representatives, as inherently problematic. There are some
:30:32. > :30:36.concerns, I think, about the legitimacy, at least the perceived
:30:37. > :30:40.legitimacy, and differences on that of referendums and I, for one, am a
:30:41. > :30:46.little bit worried that referendums because they are inherently binary
:30:47. > :30:52.are inherently divisive devices in democracy and therefore perhaps tend
:30:53. > :30:56.towards the sceptical side. I don't want to say very much, either, about
:30:57. > :31:01.Parliament because I think that will be brought up a bit later, other
:31:02. > :31:04.than a couple of things. One very interesting finding is that people
:31:05. > :31:08.still trust Parliament and MPs in particular to hold the government to
:31:09. > :31:12.account and the figure for that was significantly higher than it was for
:31:13. > :31:17.the courts. I do wonder after the whole Article 50 shenanigans, when
:31:18. > :31:21.that question is asked next time around, whether more people will
:31:22. > :31:25.think that the courts have just as much say or ability to check
:31:26. > :31:33.government than the Commons all the Lord's. The other interesting
:31:34. > :31:36.finding about Parliament, I thought, was the fact that generally
:31:37. > :31:41.speaking, given that people seem to want MPs to concentrate on local
:31:42. > :31:45.issues and their constituency work, MPs clearly are doing the right
:31:46. > :31:48.thing. If you look at the trends since the 1960s, MPs have been doing
:31:49. > :31:52.an awful lot more constituency work than they ever did. This is clearly
:31:53. > :31:56.something that the public wants them to do so I think it is impressive
:31:57. > :32:03.that what MPs do and what the public want them to do seem to be so
:32:04. > :32:06.in-line. Also on the subject of Parliament, I wanted to say
:32:07. > :32:12.something about the fact that people are not particularly impressed by
:32:13. > :32:16.the ability of Parliament to represent ordinary people's
:32:17. > :32:22.interests. I rather suspect, and there is some research on this -
:32:23. > :32:27.more needs to be done - that this is actually less of a function of what
:32:28. > :32:35.MPs do than it is a function of what MPs look and sound like. MPs are now
:32:36. > :32:41.overwhelmingly middle-class graduates. That's not true yet of
:32:42. > :32:46.the electorate. And that Miss match, I think, does encourage people to
:32:47. > :32:51.think that those people in there or in here have little understanding,
:32:52. > :32:54.little to do with them, although we do also know from research that when
:32:55. > :32:59.people actually deal with their MP, they are very satisfied with the
:33:00. > :33:04.service that they get, so there is that mismatch between people's
:33:05. > :33:07.abstract views and their particular experience. But enough of
:33:08. > :33:13.referendums and Parliament. What I want to concentrate on is attitudes
:33:14. > :33:16.to politics and political behaviour. I'm not actually very surprised that
:33:17. > :33:22.there appears to have been a drop-off in the number of people who
:33:23. > :33:27.say that they are interested in politics. I suspect that by the end
:33:28. > :33:32.of 2016, when this survey was taken, the beginning of 2017, people had
:33:33. > :33:37.had enough of politics and their answers to some extent reflected
:33:38. > :33:43.that fatigue and that, of course, was before Theresa May called a snap
:33:44. > :33:49.general election. Likewise, I'm not entirely surprised that there's been
:33:50. > :33:56.no significant rise, despite the referendum, in people feeling that
:33:57. > :34:02.they have an influence on national decisions. After all, people have
:34:03. > :34:07.only delivered their decision. The promises made during that campaign
:34:08. > :34:10.have not themselves been delivered. I think people will be waiting to
:34:11. > :34:17.see whether what they told the UK government to do back in the summer
:34:18. > :34:22.of 2016 will actually result in what they want the UK government to do as
:34:23. > :34:27.a result of that decision. I rather fear that because of the nature of
:34:28. > :34:29.some of the promises made during that campaign, that actually,
:34:30. > :34:36.because those promises may turn out to be undeliverable, that, in fact,
:34:37. > :34:43.the referendum may, in the end, end up alienating more people than it
:34:44. > :34:47.infuses but time will tell. Still, we should note, one of the
:34:48. > :34:53.interesting things about this audit and previous audits show that people
:34:54. > :34:57.don't want to be involved in national or even local
:34:58. > :35:03.decision-making. They are what one of my former colleagues at Sussex
:35:04. > :35:05.University, Paul Webb, used in research from America, called
:35:06. > :35:10.Stealth Democrats. In other words, we like other people to make the
:35:11. > :35:13.decisions for us until things get really, really serious, when we
:35:14. > :35:19.start paying attention and put pressure on them to make decisions
:35:20. > :35:24.in our interests. What I'd like to finish on and focus on is this
:35:25. > :35:28.question that Ruth brought up right at the beginning of people's
:35:29. > :35:35.likelihood to vote. As Ruth said, at the moment people, when they're
:35:36. > :35:41.asked question, 59% say they are absolutely certain to vote were a
:35:42. > :35:49.general election being called. And that, as Ruth said, is the highest
:35:50. > :35:56.ever, in common with last year. However, if you look beneath that
:35:57. > :36:01.headline figure of 59%, there are huge demographic differences there.
:36:02. > :36:06.There are very big differences when it comes to ethnicity, so 62% of
:36:07. > :36:12.white respondents said they were certain to vote but only 41% of
:36:13. > :36:18.black and ethnic minority citizens said they were sure to vote. There
:36:19. > :36:24.are huge demographic differences and disparities when it comes to
:36:25. > :36:29.education. 75% of graduates said they were certain to vote but only
:36:30. > :36:35.49% of people who were not graduates said the same. There are disparities
:36:36. > :36:44.when it comes to age, and these have already been referred to. Of the
:36:45. > :36:52.people who are aged 55 and over, 75% said they were certain to vote but
:36:53. > :36:57.of the 18 to 34-year-olds, only 44% people said they were certain to
:36:58. > :37:01.vote. And there are also big and linear disparities when it comes to
:37:02. > :37:07.class, or at least occupational grade, to use the jargon. If you
:37:08. > :37:12.break voters down into the very familiar marketing categories and
:37:13. > :37:16.ask them, are you certain to vote, 75% of a bee voters said they were
:37:17. > :37:27.certain to vote but that was only true of 66% of C one voters, offer
:37:28. > :37:33.47% of C to voters and only true of 44% of T P voters. Those disparities
:37:34. > :37:37.really worry me and I think they should worry all of us because they
:37:38. > :37:42.undermine potentially the representative must of Parliament,
:37:43. > :37:47.something I've already referred to. They in the long term, perhaps,
:37:48. > :37:50.undermine the legitimacy of our democracy, and we know from
:37:51. > :37:55.research, not just here but in other countries, particularly the United
:37:56. > :38:00.States, that they do skew public policy very noticeably, so that
:38:01. > :38:09.public policy tends to cater to the interests of the white, the
:38:10. > :38:15.well-educated, the aged and the well off. That's something I think we do
:38:16. > :38:20.need to worry about in the long and it's certainly why I, for one,
:38:21. > :38:24.anyway, and increasingly of the opinion that we need to think about
:38:25. > :38:32.compulsory voting. But that is a debate for another day, I know. For
:38:33. > :38:37.now, I'll just leave you with this observation, that although we had a
:38:38. > :38:44.very impressive turnout in the referendum, of well over 70%, and
:38:45. > :38:47.although we have 59% of people telling the audit of the beginning
:38:48. > :38:50.of last year and the beginning of this year that they were absolutely
:38:51. > :38:56.certain to vote, I would not be at all surprised if this indeed were
:38:57. > :39:02.quite a low turnout election. From all the research that I know of on
:39:03. > :39:08.turnout at elections, turnout tends to trend down quite markedly when
:39:09. > :39:11.the result is seen by the public, correctly or incorrectly, as a
:39:12. > :39:18.foregone conclusion. That doesn't strike me as giving much optimism
:39:19. > :39:23.for thinking in June lots of people will go to the polls. We also know
:39:24. > :39:27.that if you hold elections quite soon after previous sets of
:39:28. > :39:33.elections or national votes, you get a decline in turnout. We have the
:39:34. > :39:40.election in 2015, we've had the referendum in 2016, we'll have local
:39:41. > :39:43.elections in case many of you have forgotten very soon, and then we'll
:39:44. > :39:47.have the general election. If you put those things together, I think
:39:48. > :39:50.we will get voter fatigue and I think many voters will feel it is
:39:51. > :39:55.not worth turning up. If you put those together with some of the
:39:56. > :39:59.disparities I'm talking about in terms of demographics, when it comes
:40:00. > :40:04.to turning out, I think that's something that may Theresa May won't
:40:05. > :40:09.worry about in the short term but I think for all of us, we need to
:40:10. > :40:14.worry about it going forward. Thank you very much, Tim. We've heard that
:40:15. > :40:17.people may be increasingly fed up with politics, particularly by the
:40:18. > :40:22.end of this year. Referendums are inherently divisive because of the
:40:23. > :40:27.binary nature of them, noticing that most people say they don't want to
:40:28. > :40:31.be involved, which will come back to in discussion, scepticism about
:40:32. > :40:36.actual turnout, and concern about the asymmetry in terms of who
:40:37. > :40:41.actually does vote, ending with the thought that maybe we should
:40:42. > :40:46.therefore introduce compulsion, so a radical thought there. Alex, what is
:40:47. > :40:48.the answer? Well, I'm going to resist the temptation of ditching
:40:49. > :40:55.everything I was going to say and argue against compulsory voting. For
:40:56. > :41:00.those of you who don't already know, Unlock Democracy is a grassroots
:41:01. > :41:05.organisation. We have a strong thread of our work which is about
:41:06. > :41:09.increasing participation in politics and changing the culture of our
:41:10. > :41:12.politics are so whenever we look at institutional reform, we look both
:41:13. > :41:16.that whether we think it is going to empower people and whether we think
:41:17. > :41:19.it is going to encourage them to participate in politics, so I'd just
:41:20. > :41:23.like to echo what Tim said about the audit and what a useful resource
:41:24. > :41:29.that is. Obviously, one of the things we've already mentioned, both
:41:30. > :41:32.Ruth and Joel, is the public attitude to referendums. That's
:41:33. > :41:38.something I'm going to dig into a little bit more now. So we are still
:41:39. > :41:41.in a position where the majority of people, according to the audit,
:41:42. > :41:45.believe that they are an important way of deciding national questions,
:41:46. > :41:50.particularly constitutional ones, but what we haven't seen is that
:41:51. > :41:54.lasting impact in terms of engagement and participation. There
:41:55. > :41:58.are a range of international examples of referendums being used
:41:59. > :42:02.as a very positive tool for Democratic engagement and while they
:42:03. > :42:05.can build consensus, they don't always, absolutely, so I want to
:42:06. > :42:10.explore why we are not seeing that in the UK where as other democracies
:42:11. > :42:14.do. I'm very aware, as Joel pointed out, that attitudes to referendums
:42:15. > :42:20.at the moment are skewed somewhat by our feelings about the last one. So
:42:21. > :42:22.in the interests of full disclosure and transparency, our organisation
:42:23. > :42:29.did not have a position on whether or not the UK should be a member of
:42:30. > :42:33.the EU. We were split about 60/40 on Brexit but we did take a decision
:42:34. > :42:39.and were part of the formal Yes campaign in the AV referendum so we
:42:40. > :42:43.also experience of campaigning in referendums, which was another
:42:44. > :42:47.perspective. Our interest in referendums is fundamentally whether
:42:48. > :42:51.or not they are a way of engaging the electorate and helping them to
:42:52. > :42:55.build consensus and take national decisions. It is only on about the
:42:56. > :43:00.last 20 years that referendums have started to become a regular feature
:43:01. > :43:05.of British politics. Since 1997, we've had referendums on a wide
:43:06. > :43:07.range of national, regional and local issues, everything from the
:43:08. > :43:13.Good Friday Agreement, the devolution settlement and elected
:43:14. > :43:16.mayors. They can be powerful tools for direct democracy. There was
:43:17. > :43:21.evidence, for example, that shows that people who don't usually vote
:43:22. > :43:24.in elections were mobilised and motivated to vote in both the
:43:25. > :43:28.Scottish independence referendum and the Brexit referendum because they
:43:29. > :43:34.felt that it was big, important questions and their vote would make
:43:35. > :43:39.a difference. So referendums can empower the public. They can promote
:43:40. > :43:44.public understanding of important issues, but it's not automatic. I
:43:45. > :43:46.feel in the UK we have kind of imported a particular democratic
:43:47. > :43:51.tool without giving much thought about how we should actually use it.
:43:52. > :43:53.It depends on the extent on which referendums are used to start a
:43:54. > :43:59.national conversation rather than just have the binary vote that Tim
:44:00. > :44:01.mentioned. One of the main differences between the UK and other
:44:02. > :44:07.that we don't have any clear rules that we don't have any clear rules
:44:08. > :44:10.governing how we use them and what process should be used to implement
:44:11. > :44:13.a particular vote and I think that if we are going to, from a
:44:14. > :44:17.democratic point of view, learned one lesson from the recent
:44:18. > :44:21.referendum on the EU it should be that we need to set up those rules,
:44:22. > :44:24.even if we collectively decide we never wanted to use referendums over
:44:25. > :44:29.again, I think we should have a set of rules that state, if they are to
:44:30. > :44:33.be a feature of our democracy, how we should use them and in what
:44:34. > :44:38.circumstances. So I think the first question we need to resolve is what
:44:39. > :44:39.referendums are for. So, in many countries, they use referendums to
:44:40. > :44:43.ratify constitutional changes and ratify constitutional changes and
:44:44. > :44:46.this is generally how they have been used in the UK. However, because we
:44:47. > :44:52.don't have a codified constitution, there are no concrete rules either
:44:53. > :44:57.about what a constitution change is, so there is no clear set of
:44:58. > :45:00.circumstances for when a referendum must be held, so, for example, we
:45:01. > :45:05.did have referendums on directly elected local mayors, we didn't have
:45:06. > :45:10.local referendums on the creation of the Police and Crime Commissioners,
:45:11. > :45:14.which was an entirely new tier of government. So it's not clear from
:45:15. > :45:19.an objective outsider point of view white elected mayors required a
:45:20. > :45:21.referendum to be fermented but Police and Crime Commissioners
:45:22. > :45:25.didn't. You could look at the politics of the situation and say,
:45:26. > :45:28.perhaps it was not elected mayors want being intimate of the
:45:29. > :45:33.government just wanted to do it, but if you are looking at the criteria
:45:34. > :45:36.you might set out for when you use a referendum, it is not clear what the
:45:37. > :45:40.difference between the two microstructures is.
:45:41. > :45:47.The second set of problems is that there are no criteria that have to
:45:48. > :45:51.be met before the referendum can be held, so for example what should
:45:52. > :45:55.happen in the case of either result. Referendums are triggered by the
:45:56. > :45:57.Government of the day on a subject of their construction with a
:45:58. > :46:01.that they pick and at a time of that they pick and at a time of
:46:02. > :46:05.their choosing. This adds a high degree of politicisation to the mix.
:46:06. > :46:09.The subject matter of the referendum is always going to be political and
:46:10. > :46:13.contentious and it should be. But the way we set up referendums in
:46:14. > :46:19.this process politicises the process as well as the actual subject. I
:46:20. > :46:22.think that is one of the things that Tim referred to about why people
:46:23. > :46:29.pool with elections that they have some faith in the process even if
:46:30. > :46:33.they did not like the result. The process that was used in the
:46:34. > :46:37.European referendum in particular, and the lack of clarity about how
:46:38. > :46:40.the outcome would be fermented, created a real conflict between
:46:41. > :46:43.popular sovereignty and Parliamentary sovereignty. Tim has
:46:44. > :46:49.already mentioned some reasons why he thinks that the public, despite
:46:50. > :46:54.the referendum, people were not feeling they had a say on the
:46:55. > :47:02.policy. I think the other reason is that there were... That they
:47:03. > :47:08.believed that voting in the referendum would lead to an
:47:09. > :47:10.the court case happened about the court case happened about
:47:11. > :47:16.whether or not Parliament should have a vote, when it went back to
:47:17. > :47:19.Parliament, who -- for many people who voted Leave, they saw any
:47:20. > :47:23.further stages as an attempt to somehow steal the referendum from
:47:24. > :47:28.them because it had not been clearly set out at the beginning of the
:47:29. > :47:35.process would be. -- what the process would be. But fundamentally,
:47:36. > :47:41.the interesting thing about why I think the process was so poor with
:47:42. > :47:46.the EU referendum was that a let down both sides. Obviously, people
:47:47. > :47:50.who voted Leave. It should be just happening at why wasn't going back
:47:51. > :47:53.to Parliament? By people who had voted to remain felt they wanted
:47:54. > :47:57.their views to be heard and to be represented, and they were not being
:47:58. > :48:01.represented either. I think this could have been avoided if there had
:48:02. > :48:06.been more clarity about the process and how both outcomes would be
:48:07. > :48:10.implemented. The other issue around whether or not referendums can build
:48:11. > :48:15.consensus or just division is the extent to which we have a public
:48:16. > :48:21.education campaign, and I think this is one of the things we have done
:48:22. > :48:26.very, very badly so far in the UK. If you look at other countries that
:48:27. > :48:29.have used referendums and done it better, like New Zealand, when they
:48:30. > :48:35.had referendums on proportional representation, there was a publicly
:48:36. > :48:40.funded, independent body set up to run a public education campaign.
:48:41. > :48:44.There were allegations in the EU referendum is that both the
:48:45. > :48:48.campaigns lied, and there were always good to be contentious claims
:48:49. > :48:52.in a political campaign, that is the nature of politics. But what voters
:48:53. > :48:56.need our independent sources of trusted information. If we do go
:48:57. > :49:02.ahead and continue to use referendums, I think that is a very,
:49:03. > :49:06.very important area that we need to develop. I think it is interesting
:49:07. > :49:10.that there was more of that in Scotland with the independence
:49:11. > :49:14.referendum, in part because of the time frame, they had a much longer
:49:15. > :49:19.lead-in period so it was easier for civil society as well as other
:49:20. > :49:25.organisations to run those kinds of deliberative, educative campaigns.
:49:26. > :49:31.And we did see, although it has dropped back now, the audit shows
:49:32. > :49:37.there was initially more of a continued public engagement than was
:49:38. > :49:41.the EU referendum. The other thing I think we need to flag up if we are
:49:42. > :49:46.going to use referendums is whether or not there should be the use of
:49:47. > :49:54.fresh rolls. Most other countries do use some kind of super majority
:49:55. > :49:59.threshold. We did in the 1970s but the devolution referendums and we
:50:00. > :50:03.have not since. -- with the devolution referendums. This is one
:50:04. > :50:05.of the biggest, leaving the EU is one of the most significant
:50:06. > :50:11.constitutional changes since we joined the EU, and it was passed on
:50:12. > :50:19.the basis of a relatively small majority. Super requirements are
:50:20. > :50:25.usually used exactly to prevent that scenario so that nor a small
:50:26. > :50:28.majority in Parliament nor a small majority of the public can make a
:50:29. > :50:33.significant national decision that is going to affect future
:50:34. > :50:36.generations. So in Denmark, any proposals for constitutional
:50:37. > :50:42.amendments must be put to referendum and approved by at least 40% of
:50:43. > :50:46.registered electorate. The recent EU referendum would not have survived
:50:47. > :50:52.that test, it was only 37%. Equally in Switzerland, and Australia,
:50:53. > :50:57.double majorities are required for constitutional menace. So just to
:50:58. > :51:00.end, briefly, or do we go from here? We have had the referendums that we
:51:01. > :51:06.have had, what have we learned from this and how do we move forward? One
:51:07. > :51:09.obvious solution would be for the next Government to pass a Referendum
:51:10. > :51:12.Act that would create clear rules for governing the use of
:51:13. > :51:18.referendums. Not only would we recommend that, it would require
:51:19. > :51:20.setting up an independent public education campaign, but stipulate
:51:21. > :51:23.the Government must have in place a plan to deliver on the outcome of
:51:24. > :51:28.the change being proposed. I also wanted to reflect briefly on the
:51:29. > :51:32.issues that have come to light since the referendum last year of the
:51:33. > :51:37.finding of the audit has made clear is that we have an electorate that
:51:38. > :51:40.feels relatively powerless to influence a distant Westminster.
:51:41. > :51:44.Satisfaction with the system governing Britain holds at a Billy
:51:45. > :51:48.and changed 31% and the proportion of people feeling they have
:51:49. > :51:52.influence over national decision making is an abysmal 16%. What is
:51:53. > :51:55.sorely lacking in our current political arrangement is an embedded
:51:56. > :52:01.culture of political engagement and deliberation. The Leave campaign
:52:02. > :52:06.focused heavily on the rallying cry of taking back control but it is not
:52:07. > :52:10.just Brussels that is the problem, evidently people do not feel they
:52:11. > :52:13.have control in to influence over politicians at home -- over politics
:52:14. > :52:19.home. So they have to think about the way in which we do politics and
:52:20. > :52:22.in particular how we can look at adding other deliberation into our
:52:23. > :52:27.Parliamentary democracy. Democracy is a process, not just an event,
:52:28. > :52:30.casting a ballot every few years, whether it is an election
:52:31. > :52:36.referendum, is not enough, in my view. Doing politics deliberately
:52:37. > :52:40.creates an engaged electorate that has mechanisms to scrutinise policy
:52:41. > :52:42.and hold government to account. This is essential for democracy to
:52:43. > :52:46.function and we need to cultivate a function and we need to cultivate a
:52:47. > :52:51.society in which public deliberation is the norm. Fantastic, bike very
:52:52. > :52:59.much, Alex, that was a very helpful international perspective. In your
:53:00. > :53:01.view referendums can be empowering but we need an independent
:53:02. > :53:06.publication... Publication campaign, independent and impartial, I think
:53:07. > :53:12.there is these offer a House of Commons Library diffusion brand!
:53:13. > :53:15.Calling for thresholds in referendums and thinking about how
:53:16. > :53:16.we can embed deliberation in our political culture. So thank you very
:53:17. > :53:21.much.