Search

In this study, we ask how and why do Members of Parliament adopt different representational styles? Looking at MPs in four Westminster-style democracies, we identify differences between MPs and inductively explore influences on representational styles by first using participant observation to gain deep insights into the activities of a small sample of MPs and then by using semi-structured interviews from a larger sample to elucidate findings from the observations across states. Our primary focus is the method of connection between representative and citizen, as fostered by the representative while present in the constituency. Despite similar institutional and electoral contexts across countries, we find a significant variation that is influenced by both country-level and constituency-level factors. Findings suggest a continuum from highly service-oriented to highly symbolic-oriented styles, where MPs from the UK illustrate the former, and MPs from Canada illustrate the latter, though with further variation at the constituency level that is based, in part, upon both geography and demographics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The comparably small scope of municipal politics creates a unique setting within which elected officials act as representatives. Here, we explore how mayors and councillors in Canadian cities do so by addressing and explaining variation in their representational style and focus. Across three studies, we explore how these elected officials allocate their time and aspire to allocate their time between different representational activities and who they attempt to represent. We do so using data from a new survey of Canadian mayors and councillors. Canadian mayors and councillors tend to prioritise policy representation over other types of representation and aspire to spend further time on policy-related matters. Further, mayors and councillors, despite some variation, tend to prioritise representation of their cities as wholes. A number of institutional and individual-level factors help to explain variation in these responses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Service representation – the extent to which Members of Parliament (MPs) assist constituents with problems they have related to the government – is an increasingly important role of MPs in developed democracies. We explore the practice of service representation through comparison of the service orientations and activities of two MPs in different countries, New Zealand and Australia, observed during periods of participant observation with them in their electorates. Constructing service connections between MPs and their constituents is often a crucial aspect of MPs' overall representational styles. Our comparisons in this research depict the multi-dimensionality of service representation with respect to MPs' emphasis on service, the nature of their service activities, and in the factors that shape those activities. The democratic implications of our comparisons are also addressed. Deep exploration of only two cases is used in this research to develop theoretical understanding to inform future analysis of service representation and its increasing importance in the overall representational and democratic process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Standing Order 31s are permitted 15 minutes of the House's floor time each day during which selected MPs can speak for a maximum of one minute each in order to draw attention to issues or events. These have often been used to congratulate groups or individual citizens, bring attention to a problem, or make a statement on a policy issue. Increasingly, they appear to have also been used to make negative statements about other parliamentary parties or leaders, or to praise the MPs' own party. The purpose of this article is to provide evidence of the changing nature of this venue toward partisan purposes, and to highlight the trends of change and party use of this venue in recent years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]