SNP MPs are among the most eager tablers of House of Commons motions - accounting for almost 44 per cent of all so-called early day motions (EDMs) put down since the General Election last May.
The cost to the taxpayer of Nationalist MPs’ enthusiasm for EDMs so far in this parliamentary session is at around £165,000 based on the most recent estimated administrative cost for tabling a parliamentary motion. If this rate continued, then the overall cost by the end of the five-year parliament could, among SNP MPs alone, approach £1 million.
EDMs allow members to raise any subject matter they wish; many relate to local constituency issues. But they are rarely debated at Westminster.
According to the Commons website the average cost of tabling one is £290, which is the most recent estimate; albeit one that dates back to 2005/6.
So far in this parliamentary session 1328 EDMs have been tabled, costing the public purse based on this most recent estimate around £385,000. The SNP’s group of 54 MPs - just eight per cent of Westminster’s 650 MPs - has been the prime sponsors of 578 of them. The Nationalist MP who has tabled the most, 56, is Paul Monaghan, the MP for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross.
The issue of EDMs has proved controversial in the past, when, before online use became popular, costs were much higher due to an increased level of printing. In 2010, they cost £1 million a year.
In 2013, the Commons Procedure Committee published a report on EDMs and recommended no change, saying they continued to be “popular and remain a valuable tool for those MPs who use them”.
But some MPs have expressed opposition to them, believing them to be “trivial and narcissistic” and simply a means of congratulating local constituents.
Conservative backbencher, Sarah Wollaston, the MP for Totnes in Devon, who chairs the Commons health committee, has said they “cost a huge amount to administer each year and I do not think they are good value for money”. Describing EDMs as effectively MPs’ petitions, she said they had now been superseded by No 10 e-petitions, which “can be signed by everyone”.
The subject matter of EDMS ranges from the serious to the not so serious.
For example, SNP MPs have tabled motions about benefits sanctions, homelessness, the Syrian civil war and the EU referendum.
Among the latest from an SNP MP listed on the parliamentary website is one tabled by Angus Brendan MacNeil, the Western Isles MP, who wrote: “That this House congratulates the Scottish Parliament for its eye-catching end to the session, prior to the May elections, with parliamentarian and piper Stuart MacMillan piping the parliamentarians from the chamber.”
An SNP spokeswoman defended her party’s frequent use of EDMs, saying: "It is no surprise SNP MPs top the list of active parliamentarians at Westminster.
“Early Day Motions are just one of the many ways that the SNP's MPs can ensure the voices of their constituents and local communities are heard loud and clear at Westminster; our very active MPs also lodge parliamentary questions, take part in debates, question UK government ministers and perform committee work.”
She insisted SNP MPs were holding the Tories to account and standing up for individual constituents after generations of Scottish Labour MPs had sat on their hands. Their activity, she pointed out, had been praised by the Commons Speaker and had even “caught the attention of the Queen”.
The spokeswoman added: "Ian Blackford MP's EDM 1235, which seeks to annul the freeze on pensions for British citizens living overseas, is a fantastic example of how EDMs can be used to demonstrate cross-party support in the House of Commons as the motion has been signed by 93 MPs from eight different parties, including members of the Conservative Party.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel