Additional data and features are being added continuously. We aim at having an informative website for the new turn.

So feedback is more then welcome!

theyworkforyou.com seems to have had quite an impact on the way UK MPs work, or at least think about how they work – for example some have been ridiculed for never putting down any Parliamentary Questions, while others have got quite a profile from the statistics derived through it. There’s a debate about whether the impact of this has been wholly positive, in terms of working methods – but I certainly agree that anything that highlights the work of the EP, and generate interest in what MEPs do, is a good thing. (And of course I’m delighted that it proves again that the UK Lib Dem MEPs are the most cohesive!).

Doru Frantescu

While you might get the stats for the reports and opinions written by MEPs, the formula you would have to create would be terribly complex… It would involve:
(1) Larger groups get more reports than smaller groups
(2) Some committees have more reports than others
(3) Some reports are more juicy than others (EP groups scoring system)
(4) Committee chairs seldom write reports

You’re right about MEPs trying to determine what sort of representatives they want to be. Problem is I’m then not sure that that makes the EP as a whole cohesive and effective, as so many MEPs see constituency first and work in the EP second.

Anyway, whatever the shortcomings I’m intrigued by all of this in the run up to the EP elections in 2009.

I’d have to agree that plenary attendance is indeed a very crude measure of MEP effectiveness and in some cases probably more related to collecting daily allowances than anything else.

On effectiveness, I think we need to be clear about what kind of effectiveness we are talking about as it could mean different things depending on what one expects an MEP to do. Some ideas…

- issues/policy effectiveness: some MEPs are effective in Parliament in having an impact on legislation due to their indepth knowledge of a specific policy area. For example Richard Corbett on rules and internal machinations. Others are effective due to their wide range of knowledge and interests. As a measure one could look at number of reports written, amendments tabled etc.

- party effectiveness: some MEPs are extremely adept at using their position in the Parliament to work within their national party and European political group. As a measure, perhaps the positions held in the national party, e.g. are you on the NEC?

- constituency effectiveness: some MEPs do a great job of representing those who elected them in spite of the problems of regional lists and millions of voters. As a measure, perhaps the number of local press clippings, the number of meetings they speak at, the amount of PQs about local issues, the number of times they have helped channel funding or assistance to local causes etc.

In the end, perhaps the most effective MEPs are those that look at each of these areas and decide what kind of MEP they want to be. In essence, they prioritise and specialise.

Thank you again for picking up an interesting aspect of pan-EU interest.

As I suppose we were in agreement about in an earlier thread: Blogging makes a difference, for politicians, too.

So they should beat a path to your mousetrap … or how the saying goes