Map of the Week: Trust in Parliament
If Parliament loses the respect of the people, anarchy may not be far off. Trust in political institutions is the foundation for a legitimate and stable democracy.
I cannot imagine that revelations about horse manure, moat-cleaning, bottles of gin and worse will lead an angry mob to Westminster, but the expenses scandal has profoundly damaged public confidence in politicians and, possibly, Parliament itself.
It is an important distinction - the difference between the institution and the office-holder. Most people don't trust politicians, but they do, generally, trust Parliament.
Classical liberal political theory has it that scepticism about those who hold power is a vital check in the democratic process. But if citizens think that the structure itself is rotten, the entire political edifice may be in danger of collapse.
I wanted to see how Britain's confidence in its institutions compares with our European neighbours. Are we broadly supportive of our parliament? The most recent data I could find on this question comes from the European Quality of Life Survey 2007, published a couple of months ago.
What it reveals is that, even before the revelations about MPs' allowances, Britain had slightly less trust in Parliament than our European neighbours [image and data courtesy of Eurofound].
In Western Europe, defined here as the EU15, the mean score out of ten for trust in national parliament is 4.9. Including all newly joined countries in Eastern and Central Europe pulls down the average score to 4.6. In the UK it is 4.5.
The survey doesn't ask a question that relates to individuals rather than institutions, but it does quiz people about their trust in political parties and in government. When all three scores are added together, the table looks like this:
The survey authors pick out Britain as performing unusually poorly:
The results in Figure 28 show that the level of trust in political institutions is generally lowest in the transition countries of Eastern Europe; in the EU15, lack of trust in such institutions is most evident in Italy, Portugal and the UK. In general, the distribution of countries in terms of trust in political institutions is quite similar to that for trust in other people.
Institutional trust, they suggest, correlates with interpersonal trust - an important observation. To show you what they mean, here is their map for trust in other people, although you might also like to look at a different map I produced on just this topic a few weeks ago.
In the EQLS data, the UK emerges as in line with the European average, but you can see how well the Nordic countries perform and how poorly the Eastern European countries fare on both measures.
Our Parliament faces a challenge to its authority. These figures, although a couple of years old, give some idea of how resilient British confidence in our institutions is likely to be.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~18~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Presumably the level of trust in our M.P.'s is now ''beyond the pale''.
Complain about this comment
What's that funny looking island east of Iceland ?
Complain about this comment
Personally i don't trust these surveys that don't have a negative feature. The worst it can get is zero, hence a bias towards a positive result.
Complain about this comment
If you lot in the media thought that 'anarchy' or insurrection might result from certain revelations, then do you really think it is wise to reveal them? Don't the media have some responsibility not to stoke up the fires? Sadly it seems that good copy and controversy will always reign, irrespective of the misery it might cause. I'd rather the MPs carried on gorging from their troughs than have riots in our cities and our towns that would cause mayhem, death, and cost of fortune to police and remediate.
It's like a rock star taking drugs. This might encourage children or fans to do the same. But nobody would KNOW if a rock star took drugs, and would therefore not imitate him or her, if the media did not make it their business to publish the matter as loudly as possible. The rock star should not have taken the drugs, sure, but a spoilt and impulsive star can't really be held up as a role model. A newspaper, on the other hand, is run by a corporation of (usually) sober people who sit down as a committee and have the content edited, proofed and approved by a team. They have the time and ability to decide if their story will cause more harm than good, but sadly, they just don't seem to care.
It's quite troubling, and a sign of our times, that a journalist can sit back and dispassionately consider whether a news item might cause riots and death, but go ahead and publish anyway.
Complain about this comment
The inference from your piece is that less trust is 'worse'. Not sure that's true ...
Complain about this comment
LippyLipo #4 Surely we are better off knowing the truth. I applaud the media. Without them we may as well say goodbye to any freedom we still have left as the government we have is rotten to the core and has done its level best to prevent us finding out yet seeks to control and monitor our every move.
Maybe a healthy sceptiscism is healthier than blind faith and trust. That way you protect yourself. Sounds a bit bleak I know and personally I trust most people until or unless I have cause to think otherwise. However we have all been far too trusting in the past and hence the sense of outrage people are feeling at the moment. We trusted our politicians and financial industry and look where that's lead us.
Even worse we have trusted people such as priests and teachers with our children when sometimes we shouldn't have done. We have been hopelessly niaive and sometimes it has had disastrous consequences.
Complain about this comment
The more neo-liberal a society becomes, the less we trust each other. Nordic countries have evolved a social system that puts the wellbeing of their citizens first and have encouraged their industries to work together with government and unions to benefit society in general. That's never happened in the UK, hence the stalemate we've had over the years culminating in the destruction of the unions under Thatcher. The Lady did give the British people their freedom back, but at a high price. We believed, as neo-liberals, through hard work we would be able to gain the riches of the world and that some of those, who once we called our brothers, had just wanted money for doing little supported by the union. Little wonder everyone's out for themselves. After the agonising transition from heavy industry to call centre work we gained a new perception of how the world worked. Greed was good, he who had the gold made the rules. New Labour came in, just as we got through this transition. We all felt a little dirty and New Labour's message appeared to allow us to keep our greed, but give some justice to the disposssed. We should have seen it coming, however, like in 'Animal Farm', sitting at the same table as the farmer.
The French still have their strong unions and no government dares confront them. No Frenchman trusts politicians and they accept their corrupt by nature. The Italians are rather the same, but oddly their happy with Silvio. Bread and circuses?
The Germans, with their federal system and its intergration with major industries, have a system where power is mostly decentralised allowing better strutiny.
As for the new EU member states, well with the mix of former communists turned capitalist and former dissidents turned socialist what would you expect.
What we should remember is a parliament is only one estate of government. We have granted them far too much power over our lives, expecting them to protect us from worst aspects of godless capitalism. Fortunately we still had the fourth estate to expose them.
To live in this Brave New World we need one motto. 'Trust no one, especially not yourself.'
Complain about this comment
One thought I have is how trustworthy do we think we personally are. If you are economical with the truth and can be devious, then you would probably justify it by saying everyone else is at it too. There has always got to be someone who is more dishonest than we are. Second hand car dealers, Arthur Daley, estate agents and now politicians. It is true that these characters are disgusting in their 'bending' of rules, but the glee with which the public has reacted makes me wonder whether there are not elements of self justification in some quarters.
Complain about this comment
Mark
I think you are being over-optimistic in implying at the end of the piece that trust in politicians will return to previous levels.
Trust is based on a delicate mixture of information, experience and judgement. Now we have so much more information, this will overwhelm the rest...
I personally try to make my trust level for public figures based on experience and observation rather than faith and gut instinct. I never put them on a pedestal, knowing a bit about how individuals politicians act when offered money or preferment, but people with no personal experience of Westminster have clearly been genuinely shocked and outraged.
This trust won't be restored for a generation, if ever.
Complain about this comment
The country has been pitchforked into facing fundamental challenges. Not only has the economic strategy of the government failed but it also has been made very evident that the institutions of government are also sub-standard.
What we are experiencing is a sequence of shocks to our sense of well-being and confidence. It seems the world is falling apart: for those directly affected by unemployment their world has truly fallen apart. How this is all going to play psychologically is going to be as interesting as it plays out politically.
I think your expectation of anarchy is a bit premature. Anarchy means no government. What we are experiencing is too much government; so chaos would be the best description.
To Message 43 the odd symbol on the map is the logo of the European Commission. It similarity to another symbol made sinister by the Nazis is not be lost on any of us.
Complain about this comment
I'd be interested to know how those results are affected by the popularity of the particular party in power at any given time. For instance, it's quite possible that the UK results would have differed if the poll was taken in 1998-99, when much of the country was still behind the new Blair government. Trust will always dip in the dying days of an adminstration, be it Major's Conservatives or Brown's Labour, and that is surely bound to impact the question of how much trust the people have in Parliament.
I'd also be interested to know how much or how little trust the US has in its system of government, compared to European nations. The impression (perhaps crudely) is of a population that is generally more likely to revere its system of governance than us Europeans, accepting more and questioning less, through patriotism and self-belief. Having said that, it's possible that with a seemingly sharper political division between left and right in the US - between the Rush Limbaughs and the Jon Stewarts - any impact from an inherent reverence might even out, with half the country showing less trust if the party in government is "the other lot".
Complain about this comment
It's time journalists started talking about direct democracy. Parliament has served us well in the past but it has degenerated into a schoolboy-like slanging match with more worries about image than policy and it has finally been ripped apart when we find that all of them are on the fiddle. Its only going to get worse - if they can no longer fiddle their expenses to get more money they will get jobs elsewhere and we will be left with people who aren't good enough to do any other work running our country.
Technology is such that we can vote on policy directly ourselves now. All parties are the same - give up on them and the party political system and lets get back to policies. Not so much fun for political journalists of course but we will at least get the policies we want and run the country the way we want it run.
Complain about this comment
If people did not get upset over billions disappearing why would this create a stir. When was the confidence in government high? Just because they were responsible for oversight of the financial industries citizens thought they should have acted responsably but as you can see they had other things to do. Only a reflection of the attitudes of the ruling class. I believe their message to those thinking of retiring is "let them eat cake". No one is ever held accountable anymore. Maybe some serious discussion should be held about new forms of government as the present form has obviouly failed.
Complain about this comment
The biggest problem with politics and politicians is that the only time they truly are representing the people is at the hustings. Thereafter they represent the party line, however devious, and themselves . Any pretence of representing the taxpayer is forgotten almost as soon as they take office. Public opinion is disregarded by politicians continually , very often in favour of extreme and vociferous minority views totally at odds with what the silent majority desires.Now we find that politicians are demonstrating their inherent dishonesty by taking advantage of a rule system that because of the misconception that members of parliament were honourable,was regarded as an integral part of their salary, and there to be abused. Even now after being caught with their fingers in the till ,they think that because it is within the rules, they have done nothing wrong . They may be correct technically but they demonstrate the total lack of morallity and basic honesty that is required as a representative of the people ; those who have transgressed must now either resign of their own concience or be removed from parliament and debarred from holding public office. One cannot help but feel that the level to which honesty and integrity has dropped in this parliament is somehow a result of the incumbent governments lack of openness , use of spin, incompetence , and total lack of any remaining mandate to govern.
Complain about this comment
yet more euro pschobable that has little relevance to us here under this government.
the trust in the government here relates to the band of petty criminals voted into government and what we as a nation should do about it.
the longer this is dragged out the more damage been done, thus the pm should call a general election sooner than later.
Complain about this comment
I see many problems with this study.
Doesn't the fact that the same countries answer the same way to the question: "how much do you trust people in general?" mean that your whole argument is flawed. It shows that there isn't a difference between how much they trust other people, and how much they trust MP's.
Surely you should be looking at the difference between how much they trust other people and how much they trust MP's.
It is also highly unlikely that trust translates in exactly the same way between french/nordic/germanic/russian languages. There must be some subtle differences.
Your conclusion is unsupported.
Complain about this comment
Given The BBCs left wing bias...I'm not sure I trust you !
Complain about this comment
So those figures are a couple of years old - if they were up to date, I wonder which shade of grey we would be now....
Complain about this comment
Could politics have subsided to the point where people (or at least, those who are still motivated enough to) will now vote for the lesser evil, rather than the most good? I suppose it could be viewed that the electorate will now choose that over the gratuitous self-interest which seems to have driven New Labour until now. If this debacle means that politicians have will have to devote their energy to re-engaging with their electors instead of following party lines, then some good will have come of it. After all, if you vote rubbish, don't be surprised when you get rubbish.
Complain about this comment
You're right, Mark.
Whereas we may give Parliament a 4.5 out of 10 for trust, MP's as a generic bunch, would be lucky to score 3.
Trust can only be re-established if parliamentarians from both Houses are bound by tighter rules coupled with transparency of their expenditure.
The regulating body to oversee expenses should also be independent of Parliament and the usual civil service restraints.
However expenses are a mere tip of the iceberg. Stopping unjustified expenses will be like blocking one entrance into a bunnies' warren of corruption.
The old boy (girl) network will continue to flourish in more subtle ways on a "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours". Such transactions will be nigh impossible to police, so the fat cat MP's will still continue to flourish.
Complain about this comment
Members of parliament have built up property portfolios and profited using taxpayers money, including mine. This is not what I expect my taxes to be used for. It is stealing, and I want it back. So instead of writing cheques to the expenses office, pay US back, from their own pockets. Add up the total amount, and divide by the population. That is what they owe us. Now give every person in the country their share. If this is 1p, I would rather throw it down the drain than have these thieves get their hands on it.
For far too long, politicians in this country have measured their skills as a politician by performances at the ballot box and interviews, the ability to successfully not answer a question is the aim of these people. When will they understand that the people they represent are totally disinterested in such childish games, and this is why they are viewed with such derision. This country is now on its knees financially and politically, and the traditional parties have nothing to offer. Where do we turn to have our voices heard? MP's make much of their constituency work, but in reality they can merely listen, policy does not change. The whole political mainstream has become more exclusive and removed from the citizens of this country than in the recent past.
With the deteriorating economic and political systems and the revelations concerning those who have wielded power over us in these systems, we are not going to accept the status quo any longer. It is time to elect a core number of MPs to parliament drawn from lay people, to be our eyes and ears in parliament and not affiliated to any political party. With fixed terms of office and no political masters, these "peoples MPs" would report back to us the truth about the political system.
If they will not pay us back our misused taxes, then use all the repayment cheques to establish this system, it will thereafter serve as aconstant reminder to our politicians of what happened to our parliament in 2009. It is time for our parliament to do what it was always meant to do, represent the people.
Complain about this comment
As a Englishman, born and bred in this historical land, I sit here bewildered, angered, feeling extreme disappointment, and a deep sense of hopelessness.
Everyday I struggle to make ends meet. I work, and yet I live in constant recession, and I cannot afford to buy myself a item of new clothing, except perhaps, once every six months. I have to borrow money sometimes just to buy food to get me to payday at the end of the month. Do I fiddle and steal to make my life that little bit more comfortable? No, I don't. I make do and try to live within my means. In fact, I suppose one would consider me as a peasant, a low member of the labouring class. That as it may be, I am honest and steadfast in my fortitude to bear my circumstance without resorting to taking happiness or comfort from anyone else. That's a principle I believe in, and I am sure that for most others, it would resonate similarly.
Is it true that we should allow a little corruption in order that our society does not breakdown? If you answer 'yes' to this, then perhaps you are as confused and bewildered as I am, but from a obviously different mindset...for you may be wondering (like Stephen Fry) what all the fuss is about?
For me, and I suspect many others, it is not simply about the 'fiddle', but about the 'principle', and the expectation of it being upheld by those we entrust with the keys to our public coffers, and to the betterment of our country. It has been shown quite explicitly that we the people have been fools, and have been taken for a ride by those we are supposed to trust.
Business is now dictating our lives, and is steering the British people towards a federal Euro-superstate we do not want to be a part of. No referendum, no voice to declare our own intentions for our own future. We are on a ride of globalisation that is detrimental to our country, and Brown and his Euro-cohorts see nothing wrong in dictating the terms for us, in selling our sovereignty away. Trust, Mr. Easton, as you rightly state, is a important adhesive of our society, any society. Today, as you might well fathom, it is non-existent in this country.
Argue for me if you can, why I should trust the current incumbents of any party serving as a representative of the people, when all along, it is quite evident they have been serving themselves? Damage control is now underway, but it won't wash with the people. We will see a number of incumbents used as scapegoats and sacrifices, in order to feed to the people so that they give back their trust. It won't work!
Yes, there may well be incumbents whom have not 'fiddled', but you can't expect me or anyone else to believe that they did not know the system, and how others abused it. They kept silent for their own good, and that is dishonourable. Trust? I can't remember what that is. I know the government trust in me to pay my taxes, and to pay taxes on everything I buy, particularly they trust that I pay my council tax. If I don't, I am soon summoned to court and threatend and menaced to pay it. Afterall, if I don't pay my taxes, they will be less in the public coffers to fiddle from, and we can't have that can we? Perhaps, whilst the people were sleeping, corruption became an accepted tradition, and that we are finding out that in corruption we can trust, and that we the peasants, sorry people, should be happy with our lot?
Argue for me then, Mr Easton, whom do I trust with my vote? Is there any point? Are there any maps or statistics that point me in the right direction. Oh, and one other thing I might ask...have newspaper editors suddenly had a epithany for truth, because from the media for the last decade or so, it has spun the spin that the fiddlers have spat at the people, without so much as a ounce of journalistic merit being applied. Why the sudden turnaround, what's around the corner coming at us?
Complain about this comment
I have to say that this has polarised my views as to how parliament should be consituted and underpins a need for an English Parliament. Thwere have been calls to cut 10% of the seats in the Commons and I agree, but into this equation you also have to put Scottish MPs,Northern Irish and to a certain extent Welsh Members. Arguably these already have their parliaments and certainly the Lothian question will not go away. It seems to me that the further these MPs have to travel the more urgent the issue is. I travel to and from Manchester and Birmingham from London and can do so in a matter of hours but it seems to me that those needingh to stay overnight can stay in hotels for which they can claim at as capped rate like the rest of us and most hotels have conference facilities. Hence they will not and and don't need properties. For those North of the Birmingham Manchester devide there may be a case for Local councils to provide a flat at Parliamentary expense. For those in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland their seats in the Commons should be abolished as their policies will be decided respectively by their Parliaments or Assemblies and consideration should be given to full autonomy and a federated state, where the regional CEO's could meet anywhere to settle National issues. This is in my way of thought the only way left for this problem to be sorted out. There would also be the rule that only nationals of their own country could sit in their own parliament. Simples Isn't it?
Complain about this comment
Some of us love this country and this loss of respect for our parliament will have caused daamage world wide to our image. Regulation and reform need to be the elements of progress now and perhaps a period of armistice for fiscal payback. Can we hear more though about those that try to get it right: (including MPS and politicians:) ordinary folk, public and voluntary sector and professions, who do what they do out of love or duty and a job well done.
Complain about this comment
Looking at the mp's 'expenses' claims, I think our parliament compares to an organized crime syndicate running the country!!
Complain about this comment
Over the property I think it should be calculated with what the tax payer has contributed to the 2nd home, this then taken into account on all profit made and a proportion of the profit paid to the tax system. So if a MP recived 20 percent of the price of the property from the tax man then 20 percent of the total value should be paid back to the tax man and not just the CG tax owed on the property.
I wont be casting a vote for a very long time we have canceled our labour party mambership.
Complain about this comment
Of course it is appauling to read about the Westminster circus. On the one hand we have a Labour govn trying to resolve globle issues, some of their making and others of the bankers making, and Cameron constantly crow and bleating on about what 'others' are doing and having nothing of substance to offer as an alternative. What I fear most is not several current MP's or the aparant hash Labour are making of getting us out of this mess; is Cameron with his huge Oxfordshire pile apparently over laidened with wisteria winning the next or any election. I fully support the deselection of every MP that has been caught and replaced with 600 white suited independant nominees.
They offer us mortals joint equity to get us on the property ladder where we pay monthly for this privilage and on the sale of the property they collect that % of the new value. This system was designed to take a share of the increase in value. The MP's should be required to operate on the same basis when they sell their 2nd 3rd 4th homes.
It will not be long before the same is discovered amongst our £200000+ pa council executives.
Complain about this comment
Interesting Map of Citizens' confidence in their Political institutions.
Of course you have to view its colour scheme with some scepticism: Afterall, it is only 12 months ago the deep, dark Blue of nearly full 'Trust' in the body-politic would certainly have also been totally covering Iceland!
My! How time and political leadership flies!
Agreed, the MPs Expenses' row is not enough to tip over the UK Public into street demonstrations, but, coupled with the ongoing Economic downturn, the failure to offer England its own Parliament, the failure to hold a Referendum on the EU (for Constitution, Lisbon and Membership), the UK body-politic is on the cusp of experiencing something very nasty in the near future.
It may be that the local Council Elections and curiously, the lamentable EU Elections, will allow some venting of Public frustration, but, Brown, Cameron, Clegg are still playing Westminster village yaaabooo-politics when they really need to be looking at and following up UK Citizens' utter disenchantment with the whole lot of them.
Otherwise, it is entirely likely a few additional UKIP, BNP, MonsterRaving Loony representatives etc. may be the least of their worries.
"Our Parliament faces a challenge to its authority": Now that is an interesting perspective when the list of 'failures' (above) to reflect UK/England Citizens' perceived political ambitions/interests is taken into consideration.
Just which 'authority' are you referring to Mr Easton?
Those 650 exposed not only as unresponsive to their Electorate's wishes, but also as venal, corrupt and in some cases crooked? Or, do you mean that an incredibly patient/docile/disinterested British Public are stirring as they recognise it is their fundamental 'authority' as the Citizen Electorate was and is being totally neglected?
Civil unrest is just waiting one more spark of revelation about the ruling elites' duplicity and corruption.
Complain about this comment
"The Declaration of Independence declares the principle that government derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. I DO NOT GIVE MY CONSENT TO BE LIED TO, I don't know anyone who gives their consent to be lied to. Moreover, one cannot give consent to be lied to because one cannot know what one is consenting to. No court would enforce a contract where one party does not know the terms of the contract being agreed to.
The Constitution does not authorize the government to lie to We The People. The tenth amendment bars the government from presuming that right. When the government lies, it therefore acts unconstitutionally and illegally. A government that lies to the people breaks faith with the people, violates the contract between the government and the people under which the people consent to be governed. A government that lies to the people delegitimizes itself. A government that lies to the people ceases to be the lawful government of this land.'' (WHATREALLYHAPPENED.COM)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Complain about this comment
SSnotbanned #2 - if you mean the islands half way between Iceland and UK it's the Faroe Islands
Complain about this comment
Mr Brown - please go before it is too late to save this great institution...........
Complain about this comment
tim_g ''Faroe Islands'' ? Gee thanks. 12 stars to you .I thought they (Faroe Islands) were somewhere off Egypt.
An up to date map probably would have UK as an outline, or perhaps with David Hume's (1711-1776)missing blue...
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS