A Caroline Flack story that turned out to be much, much more.
The petition had been thrown out by the Leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg because it was hosted on change.org.
In his correspondence, he noted that “petitions started on other websites are not considered for debate.
“This is because the Petitions Committee is not able to verify the signatures on the petition or contact petitioners about any parliamentary business.”
This was later confirmed by a parliamentary spokesperson, who said that this has always been the way for the following reasons:
- The Petitions Committee, as part of parliament, is unable to moderate external site petitions, whilst they can ensure those on the Parliament and Government site meet the rules set by the House of Commons.
- Petitions must be within the remit of the Commons or UK Government (petitions on external sites can be about anything, including things which MPs or the Government don’t have jurisdiction over)
- Petitions on external sites don’t just cover British Citizen/UK residents
- They have no way of knowing what measures, if any, other sites take to prevent fraudulent signatures.
Not just a Caroline Flack story
It struck me that this wasn't just a Caroline Flack story. How many other petitions started on change.org had escaped the gaze of parliament because they were hosted on the wrong site?
A petition started the following month - with almost half a million people calling for post-Brexit food assurances - fell into the same trap because it wasn't hosted on the official parliament petitions site.
Under parliamentary procedure petitions signed by 10,000 people will get a response from the government, with those signed by more than 100,000 people considered for debate in parliament.
There is a real threat that grave public concerns are being ignored because of this - more must be done to make that known.
No comments:
Post a Comment