Modernisation Committee Report: Access to the House of Commons

Wendy Chamberlain Excerpts

Thursday 16th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Wendy Chamberlain (North East Fife) (LD)]

I rise to speak, on behalf of the Liberal Democrats, both as a member of the Modernisation Committee and, at one point during this inquiry, as a witness. That is also true of the Leader of the House, who gave evidence to the Committee before he became its Chair.

The work we do in this place is complicated, but sometimes it is more complicated than it needs to be, and sometimes we revel in that. I am very conscious that we are having this debate during the final stages of the parliamentary Session and ping-pong, and I as an opposition MP have been leading my colleagues to vote No because we disagree with a Government motion to disagree with a Lords amendment, so we sometimes make this place overly complicated, and the whats and whys of how we do things do not often make sense externally.

I maintain and agree with the shadow Leader of the House, the right hon. Member for Hereford and South Herefordshire (Jesse Norman), and indeed the Leader of the House, that once we are here, we see that while there are definitely things that could be done better or differently, that is absolutely not the case for all things. We must always be aware of the need not to throw the baby out with the bathwater when considering what we should do. I came into Parliament in December 2019, and over the last two Parliaments—in both 2019 and 2024—we have had a huge turnover of legislators, and understanding why things are the way they are, and what needs to be improved, does take time.

I want to make my remarks in line with the three sections of the Modernisation Committee’s report, and I echo others in commending the House Administration for its constructive response. The reality is that in many circumstances, but particularly in relation to accessibility more generally, it knows fine well what the issues are in this place, and it is as keen to ensure that it makes visible progress on those issues as are we on the Committee and parliamentarians more widely.

However, the report summary talked about clear and prompt action, but we need to acknowledge that it will not be quick. I want to mention our experience yesterday. I am the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on PANS PANDAS, a paediatric condition—have I mentioned that I am running the London marathon for it a week on Sunday?—and yesterday some young people came in for a roundtable in advance of the Backbench Business debate we are hoping to have in a few weeks’ time, because it was important to hear directly from those young people about their experience of the condition. However, one of them was using a wheelchair.

My fantastic team in Westminster, Kathryn and Claudia, incorporated a tour into those young people’s experience as part of their day, but the reality was that the one young person in a wheelchair had a completely different experience from everybody else. There is no access to St Stephen’s Hall or the top of the Westminster steps, which meant she could not see that part of the tour. A moveable ramp for the few steps from Central Lobby to St Stephen’s Hall, which could be used when needed, would be an option. The lift on the accessible lift route is really small. The young person yesterday had one of those quite mobile wheelchairs, but I have been doing bus journeys with wheelchair users in my constituency recently, and the technology is advancing significantly, but the necessary space and access are not. There are also very simple things like the fact that the carpet outside the accessible lift has a really deep pile, which makes it difficult to move across.

Among the evidence that the Committee heard, what we heard from people working on the estate, about the difficulties they face, was pretty arresting. There is the Clerk who cannot progress in his career because he is no longer able to sit at the Table in front of you, Madam Deputy Speaker, and therefore his development opportunities are restricted. There is the member of staff for an MP who started on a Speaker’s internship for 12 months—a way of getting people from different backgrounds into Parliament—and was fortunate enough to go on and work for the same MP afterwards, but it took 15 months for the nearest wheelchair accessible toilet to be accessible to him, because he could not open the door before that point.

As a Committee, that was shameful for us to hear and it shows that we have so much more to do. It is important that we remember that Parliament is a place of work and a place of democracy, and when we consider the restoration and renewal proposals—I agree with the shadow Leader of the House—we need to keep accessibility at the forefront, regardless of what our overall opinions on R and R might be.

On procedure and processes, I remember meeting the previous Leader of the House, the right hon. Member for Manchester Central (Lucy Powell), to discuss the Committee when the Government were looking at setting it up. On how I thought about the Committee, the equivalent that I came up with, from my time in the police, was a tasking and co-ordinating group. The remit of the Committee is wide and our make-up is unique, with the Leader of the House as Chair. The decisions on some elements of the work that we have looked at belong to other Committees, so we should be able to task and co-ordinate with them accordingly. It is right that decisions and inquiries on call lists, electronic voting—we had issues with that this week—and proxies are being led and reported on by the Procedure Committee. Our Committee also recently looked at virtual Select Committee appearances.

The evidence we heard from disabled MPs demonstrates that there is absolutely more that can be done to accommodate them. Also—this has been my own experience of late as a Chief Whip—there are practices that we have utilised in the past that in some ways we have forgotten about, such as nodding through. I am not suggesting that we go back to what is depicted in the James Graham play “This House”, but there are accommodations that can and should be made. We should be constantly challenging ourselves in that regard. Certainly, I see it as part of my role as Chief Whip for my group to make those challenges and ask those questions.

On reading the report, I also thought about my own reflections on covid. As I said, I was a new MP in 2019. There is no doubt that there was an impact on how relationships were built here in Parliament as a result of the practices we had during covid. We participated in the Chamber virtually, which gave no opportunity to learn how to intervene, or to just have those conversations in the Tea Room and the Lobby. It was quite easy to become siloed in our parliamentary groups, and I think all of us here know well that this place is at its best when it works in a constructive, cross-party way to make things progress.

The last section is on communicating what the House does. Generally, the recommendations attempt to strike the right balance between the traditions of the House— I say that as a trustee of the History of Parliament Trust—and the need for Parliament and its processes to be understandable to the wider public. There is clearly more to do, but it is important that we continue to assess whether that balance is being struck correctly.

I want to highlight the work of the Education and Engagement Team. I recently attended an event here in Parliament. Sarah Donald, the headteacher of Dairsie primary school in my constituency, is on the UK Parliament teacher ambassador programme, which will give her the opportunity to be an accredited partner of the Education and Engagement Team. That education and understanding of our democracy and how it works is really important. We are currently having Scottish Parliament elections, so knowing the difference between what an MSP can do and MP can do is important. Indeed, last week I visited Busy Bees nursery in Strathkinness to talk on the topic of “People who help us”. It transpires that it is really quite difficult to explain to four-year-olds what the job of an MP is. I have to say that when I visited my child’s nursery school a number of years ago in the unfirm of a police officer, I was much more popular.

To conclude, the Modernisation Committee is an important feature of this current Parliament. We can and should be in a position to continue to review progress and we should continue to do so as this Parliament progresses. I am very pleased that the House Administration has engaged with the report so constructively and I look forward to revisiting this topic in due course.