British Lawmakers Not Night Owls
As the clock approaches midnight, English streets empty, pubs toss out the last drinkers and the Tube begins its final run.
But much to the annoyance of its members, one London institution refuses to call it a night: the Houses of Parliament.
Forced by party whips or conviction to remain on hand for votes that may never come, many lawmakers eventually arrive home fuming. Now, almost a third of the 659 members of the House of Commons have linked up to demand an end to anti-social hours.
They have called for sweeping changes to brush away the inefficiencies that have built up over seven centuries. Their goal is to make the House of Commons function more like a modern business -- and the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly, which rarely go beyond 5 p.m.
"When national emergencies arise, we are all happy to be there," said Labor Party lawmaker Julia Drown, who concedes many of her colleagues show up for votes only half-awake. "But it is the same points being raised over and over. A few people keep the debate going, supposedly to try to stop the legislation getting through. The place needs to grow up."
Though members of the House of Lords also keep long hours, they aren't complaining, perhaps because they feel they're fighting for the chamber's very survival, as they undergo major reforms initiated by Prime Minister Tony Blair's government.
The House of Commons generally goes past 10:30 p.m. at least once a week and records two all-nighters per session.
To pass the late-night time, lawmakers can be found just about anywhere but the main chamber, where the debate often is conducted by only a few hardy, and determined, members.
The others lay claim to the Commons' green sofas, sprawled out in a bid to get a few hours' sleep. Some drink and trade gossip in the members' lounge overlooking the River Thames, and a few sneak away to their offices, ready to return if a vote is called.
It is not until the bells ring, signaling a ballot in eight minutes, that hundreds of lawmakers emerge as if from hiding to dutifully file into the "aye" or "nay" chambers to be counted for the vote.
This month, a Commons committee responded to the calls for change with a series of proposals which, if enacted, would curtail most debates at 10 p.m. and ensure votes take place during daytime hours.
But while there is cross-party agreement that some change is necessary, if only to attract talented newcomers, the opposition Conservative Party disagreed so strongly with the committee's recommendations that it put out its own report.
Among the Tories' concerns are that cutting off debate will cost the out-of-power parties one of their most effective measures of harassing the government: filibustering, or delaying government measures by debating them to death.
"Divorcing the vote from the debate also further reduces the likelihood of members being influenced in heir voting behavior by what is actually said in debate," said George Young, the Tories' leader in the Commons.
The Labor Party, which enjoys a commanding majority, insists the changes are needed, with no small pressure coming from the influx of new Laborites elected in 1997, who have young families to which they are eager to return home.
One new member, Tess Kingham, announced this spring that she will not seek re-election, likening the Commons to a "19th-century gentlemen's debating society."
For Labor member Desmond Browne, some solution will have to be found that allows all parties to feel legislation is still receiving proper scrutiny, while doing away with some of the inefficiencies.
"My ambition is simple," Browne said. "To go to bed on the same day that I wake up."