Community hub
0 subscribers7 pages, 0 posts
Recent from talks
All channels
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Welcome to the community hub built to collect knowledge and have discussions related to Early day motion.
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Early day motion
View on Wikipediafrom Wikipedia
In the Westminster parliamentary system, an early day motion (EDM) is a motion, expressed as a single sentence,[1] tabled by a member of Parliament, which the Government (in charge of parliamentary business) has not yet scheduled for debate.
History and uses
[edit]The name derives from the idea that an MP who tables one is calling for a debate on the topic covered by the motion to be held "on an early day". In practice, early day motions are rarely debated in the House, and their main purpose is to draw attention to particular subjects of interest. Government ministers, Whips, Parliamentary Private Secretaries, the Speaker of the House of Commons and Deputy Speakers do not normally sign EDMs.[2] EDMs remain open for signature for the duration of the parliamentary session.
EDMs can be tabled on matters ranging from trivial or humorous topics to those of great importance. The censure motion by which the Labour Government of James Callaghan was ejected had its origin in an early day motion (no. 351 of 1978–79), put down on 22 March 1979, by Margaret Thatcher.
MPs may ensure the text of an EDM is printed in Hansard by mentioning it by number in questions to the Leader of the House of Commons after the Business Statement (normally on a Thursday when the house is in session).
EDMs tabled on serious topics have included one demanding the release of Nelson Mandela when he was incarcerated in apartheid South Africa, and one calling for a consultation on the fingerprinting of children in schools without parental permission.[3] Shortly after the 2005 general election, 412 of the 646 MPs signed EDM 178 calling for a Climate Change Bill;[4] only three other early day motions had ever been signed by more than 400 MPs.[5]
In the 2021-2022 Parliamentary session, an Early Day Motion which expressed support for WAVE Trust's 70/30 campaign to reduce child maltreatment by 70% by 2030 achieved the support of 151 Members of Parliament and, in doing so, became the most supported EDM of that particular session.[6]
Criticism
[edit]Conservative MP Robert Courts has been an outspoken critic of EDMs, describing them as "parliamentary graffiti." Courts has said that EDMs are generally tabled by MPs on behalf of "lobbyists or groups keen to show themselves as doing something", that they are "politically impotent" and a waste of taxpayers' money.[7]
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ "Early day motions". parliament.uk. Retrieved 3 April 2010.
- ^ "Early Day Motions Factsheet". House of Commons Information Office. June 2010. Retrieved 7 November 2015. "Parliamentary Private Secretaries must not associate themselves with particular groups advocating special policies”.
- ^ "EDM 686 - Biometric Data Collection In Schools". UK Parliament. 19 January 2007. Retrieved 28 November 2009.
- ^ "Early day motion 178 - Climate Change". Michael Meacher, MP. 24 May 2005. Archived from the original on 13 January 2006. Retrieved 15 March 2007.
- ^ "October update on the Climate Change Bill". South Hams Friends of the Earth. 12 June 2006. Archived from the original on 24 March 2007. Retrieved 15 March 2007.
- ^ "Giving every child the best start in life - Early Day Motions - UK Parliament". Retrieved 29 March 2023.
- ^ "Early Day Motions". Robert Courts. Retrieved 21 August 2019.
External links
[edit]- Early Day Motions Database
- Volunteer run site with Early Day Motions re-presented and supplying raw data
.svg){kind=small} | This article related to government in the United Kingdom or its constituent countries is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by adding missing information. |
Early day motion
View on Grokipediafrom Grokipedia
Definition and Core Mechanics
Formal Definition and Origins of the Term
An early day motion (EDM) is a formal notice of motion tabled by a Member of Parliament (MP) in the House of Commons, expressing a proposed resolution or opinion for which no specific date has been allocated for debate.[8] [1] These motions serve primarily to gauge parliamentary support, record MPs' views on issues, or highlight campaigns, rather than to initiate substantive discussion, as they are rarely selected for debate due to the absence of fixed timing and competition from government business.[8] The procedure originated in the mid-19th century as a mechanism for MPs to give notice of intended motions without nominating a particular debate day, evolving from practices in the 1850s and 1860s where such notices were listed on the parliamentary order paper.[8] By 1865, these appeared explicitly under the heading "Notices of Motions for which no days have been fixed" in the Notice Paper, with an early recorded instance on 24 July 1849, when MP Henry Drummond tabled a motion on taxation at the "earliest opportunity."[8] The colloquial term "early day motion" emerged in the 1940s, reflecting the aspirational intent for prompt consideration, though actual debate remained improbable; systematic numbering of EDMs began in 1944, standardizing their tracking.[8]Procedural Steps for Tabling and Support
To table an Early Day Motion (EDM), a Member of Parliament (MP) submits it to the Table Office of the House of Commons, typically when the House is sitting.[9][1] The motion must adhere to strict formatting rules: it requires a short, neutral, descriptive title and a single sentence of no more than 250 words beginning with "That this House...", with clauses separated by semi-colons and concluding with "and".[2][1] Prohibited content includes criticism of MPs, peers, judges, or members of the royal family (unless the title specifies "Conduct of..." and it forms the main subject), references to active UK court proceedings, ironic or abusive language, advertisements, or repetitive motions on minor variations of the same topic.[2][1] For paper submission, the MP writes the title and text, verifies compliance with procedural rules, signs the document, and delivers it to the Table Office.[9] Electronic submission is also available through parliamentary systems, allowing MPs to enter details via the internal database managed by the Table Office.[10] Upon acceptance, the EDM is assigned a sequential number (e.g., EDM 201) and published in the daily Order Paper and Vote Bundle, making it visible to all MPs.[1] Amendments follow a similar process but are denoted with "A" and a sub-number (e.g., EDM 201A1), limited to 250 words, and cannot be signed by supporters of the original motion.[1] Support for an EDM is demonstrated by other MPs adding their signatures, which is optional and requires no minimum threshold to proceed.[2][1] Signatures can be added electronically via the EDM database or in person at the Table Office after the motion is tabled, with the list updated daily in parliamentary papers.[10][1] Government ministers, party whips, Parliamentary Private Secretaries, the Speaker, and Deputy Speakers are conventionally barred from signing.[1] The lead MP may withdraw the EDM at any time, and individual signatories can remove their names, for instance, if they support an amendment or take up a ministerial role.[1] In practice, most EDMs attract only 1-2 signatures, though sessions typically see 6-7 garnering over 200 and 70-80 exceeding 100.[1]Distinction from Other Parliamentary Motions
Early day motions (EDMs) in the UK House of Commons are distinguished from other parliamentary motions primarily by their lack of a fixed date for debate, rendering them aspirational proposals that enter a backlog on the order paper without guaranteed discussion.[11] This contrasts with substantive motions, which are self-contained proposals expressing an opinion or seeking a decision, typically selected for debate and subject to amendment and division (voting) when moved in the House.[12] Whereas substantive motions, often tabled by the government or during allocated backbench or opposition time, advance specific actions or policy critiques, EDMs seldom progress beyond tabling and signature collection, with fewer than 2% ever debated.[13] Government motions, which control the bulk of parliamentary business under Standing Order No. 14, receive priority scheduling to facilitate executive priorities such as budget approvals or procedural matters, frequently leading to immediate or timed debates and votes.[12] In distinction, EDMs are tabled solely by backbench Members—excluding ministers and parliamentary private secretaries—and serve non-legislative functions like highlighting issues or praying against negative-resolution statutory instruments, without encroaching on government-dominated time slots.[13] Opposition Day motions, allocated a minimum of 20 days per session, enable direct challenges to government policy through structured debates culminating in votes on amendments or the main question, a level of procedural traction absent in EDMs.[12] EDMs also differ from private members' motions, which backbenchers may secure via ballot under Standing Order No. 14 for limited debate time, often focusing on bills or resolutions with potential legislative impact, whereas EDMs emphasize symbolic endorsement via signatures from other Members, lapsing at the end of a parliamentary session without automatic carryover.[11] Amendments to EDMs are permissible if within scope and under 250 words but occur infrequently, preserving the original text's stability unlike the more fluid amendment processes for debated substantive or subsidiary motions such as procedural points of order.[13] This signature-driven mechanism underscores EDMs' role as a barometer of backbench sentiment rather than a pathway to binding resolutions, setting them apart from motions requiring formal House approval for matters like sub judice issues or prior session decisions, which demand substantive form with active tabling.[14]Historical Evolution
Introduction in the Early 20th Century
Early day motions, though originating in mid-19th-century parliamentary practice where members submitted notices for debates on unspecified future days, gained prominence in the early 20th century amid tightening government control over the House of Commons agenda, which curtailed private members' allocated time for initiating debates.[8] This shift compelled backbenchers to rely more heavily on such unfixed motions to signal intent or rally support, as listed in the Notice Paper under headings like "Notices of Motions for which no days have been fixed," a format established by 1865 but increasingly utilized post-1900.[8][13] By the 1910s and 1920s, the practice evolved to include multiple co-signatories, reflecting backbench efforts to amplify collective voice without guaranteed debate; records indicate this became commonplace around 1921, prompting procedural limits such as capping initial supporters at six names by 1928 to manage administrative load.[8] These motions served primarily as expressive tools rather than precursors to action, with rare progression to debate due to the executive's prioritization of its business, a dynamic reinforced by reforms like the Parliament Act of 1911 that further centralized agenda control.[13] Further formalization occurred in the late 1920s and 1930s, with expanded signature collection emerging as a key feature, though systematic tracking remained informal until wartime constraints in the 1940s highlighted their utility—for instance, motions protesting Nazi atrocities garnered hundreds of signatures amid restricted debate opportunities.[8] In this era, early day motions thus transitioned from ad hoc notices to a structured backbench mechanism for opinion aggregation, underscoring the Commons' adaptation to diminished individual influence on the legislative timetable.[8][13]Expansion and Patterns of Use Post-1945
Following the conclusion of World War II, early day motions (EDMs) transitioned from wartime expedients—where debate time was severely constrained—into a more routine backbench instrument for signaling opinions and building cross-party consensus on non-urgent matters. The procedural framework, including numbering and indexing for signatures, had solidified by 1943, enabling post-1945 MPs to table motions on topics ranging from domestic policy to international affairs without anticipating formal debate.[8] Usage remained modest initially, reflecting the dominance of government control over the agenda and limited backbench assertiveness in the immediate postwar era. Quantitative expansion accelerated from the 1950s onward, driven by growing numbers of MPs seeking to publicize constituency concerns and test party unity. In the 1945-46 parliamentary session, only 71 EDMs were tabled, rising to approximately 100 per session throughout the 1950s.[8] By the late 1960s, amid heightened political polarization on issues like economic reform and foreign policy, the figure climbed to around 400 annually, and it reached about 700 in the early 1980s before surging to 1,262 in the 1985-86 session.[8] This growth correlated with procedural reforms emphasizing backbench influence, though EDMs continued to function symbolically rather than legislatively, with signatures serving as informal barometers of support—such as the 482 signatures on a 1963-64 motion advocating improved pensions for ex-servicemen.[8] Patterns of use post-1945 emphasized expressive rather than substantive roles, with backbenchers leveraging EDMs to critique government inaction or rally support for niche causes like social welfare and human rights. All-party EDMs on apolitical topics, such as commemorations or humanitarian appeals, often amassed the highest signatures, indicating their utility in fostering bipartisan goodwill absent whipped votes.[8] Opposition MPs tabled a disproportionate share during Labour governments in the 1960s and 1970s, using them to highlight fiscal or immigration policy divergences, while Conservative backbenchers post-1979 increasingly focused on Thatcher-era deregulatory themes.[15] Signature accumulation, formalized in the 1930s but amplified post-1945, allowed MPs to quantify influence without risking division lobbies, though empirical analysis shows most EDMs garnered fewer than 10 supporters, underscoring their role as low-stakes advocacy over agenda-setting power.[8]Shifts in Volume and Focus from 1997 Onward
Following the Labour Party's landslide victory in the 1997 general election, which produced a large parliamentary majority and an influx of 101 new Labour women MPs, the volume of early day motions (EDMs) tabled in the House of Commons remained elevated, reflecting heightened backbench activity. In the 1997 Parliament (spanning sessions from 1997 to 2001), a total of 5,274 EDMs were tabled, enabling MPs to signal opinions on a wide array of issues amid reduced government control over the agenda.[16] This continued a trajectory of growth from earlier peaks, such as 2,574 EDMs in the 1992-93 session, but the post-1997 period saw sustained high usage, with volumes exceeding 2,000 per session into the mid-2000s.[13] Volumes peaked again in the 2005-06 session at 2,924 EDMs, coinciding with ongoing Labour governance under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, before beginning a gradual decline influenced by procedural changes like the establishment of the Backbench Business Committee in 2010, which provided alternative avenues for debate.[13] By the 2009-10 session, numbers fell to 1,248, and recent sessions have normalized to 1,000-2,000 EDMs annually, with 1,205 tabled in 2016-17 and approximately 4,383 from December 2019 to June 2023 across multiple sessions.[13][1][7] This downward trend partly stems from MPs' growing perception of EDMs as resource-intensive with limited impact, leading to informal boycotts by some backbenchers since the 2010s.[7] In terms of focus, the immediate post-1997 period marked a notable emphasis on gender-related and feminist topics, driven by the increased descriptive representation of women in Parliament. Of the EDMs in the 1997 Parliament, 239 addressed 'women's' issues, with 144 classified as explicitly feminist, covering areas like violence against women, abortion rights, and rape; Labour women MPs signed such motions at higher rates (average 28.7 feminist EDMs) than their male counterparts (23.4), indicating a substantive shift toward advocacy on these fronts.[16] Beyond gender, EDMs increasingly highlighted constituency-specific concerns, public campaigns, and critiques of government policy, such as local achievements or international matters, aligning with backbenchers' electoral incentives to build reputational capital in safe seats.[13][17] Subsequent years saw diversification, with EDMs adapting to broader societal shifts, including more attention to child welfare campaigns (e.g., reducing maltreatment) and procedural innovations reducing reliance on them for agenda-setting.[13] However, the core expressive function persisted, though with diminishing signatures per motion in later sessions (e.g., 32,722 total signatures across 1,312 EDMs in 2012-13), underscoring a pivot toward symbolic rather than collective advocacy amid fragmented party discipline post-Blair.[13]Primary Functions and Applications
Expressive and Symbolic Roles
Early Day Motions (EDMs) enable Members of Parliament (MPs) to formally express opinions on diverse subjects, serving primarily as a vehicle to publicize individual or collective views rather than initiate substantive debate. This expressive function allows MPs to table statements on local issues, such as the closure of community facilities like post offices, or national concerns, thereby placing them on the parliamentary record for visibility among colleagues and the public.[8] In practice, since EDMs are rarely allocated time for discussion, they function as low-cost declarations that highlight matters warranting attention, with the number of signatures indicating informal levels of support.[1][18] Symbolically, EDMs act as gestures of solidarity, signaling an MP's alignment with constituents, campaigns, or events to foster goodwill or pressure external actors without binding commitments. For instance, motions congratulating local sports clubs on achievements or marking anniversaries exemplify their use in demonstrating routine representational support, often garnering signatures to amplify symbolic endorsement across party lines.[8] A notable case occurred in the 2001-02 session, when an EDM addressing the India-Pakistan conflict attracted 502 signatures, the highest recorded at the time, underscoring how such motions can encapsulate parliamentary sentiment on urgent global issues through aggregated symbolic backing rather than procedural advancement.[8] This role extends to gauging broader opinion, as MPs monitor signature trends to assess intra-party or cross-bench dynamics on non-legislative topics.[10]Advocacy and Campaigning Mechanisms
Early day motions (EDMs) serve as a key mechanism for parliamentary advocacy by enabling backbench members of Parliament (MPs) to table formal proposals highlighting specific issues, thereby inviting signatures from colleagues to quantify levels of support across the House of Commons. This process allows MPs to publicly align with causes, exerting indirect pressure on the government or related bodies without necessitating debate time, as EDMs are rarely selected for discussion. The accumulation of signatures—ranging from a handful to over 100 in prominent cases—functions as a visible indicator of intra-parliamentary consensus, which campaigners leverage to build momentum for broader initiatives.[1][11] In practice, advocacy through EDMs often involves coordinated efforts by external organizations lobbying MPs to sponsor or endorse motions, transforming individual expressions into collective campaigns. For instance, non-governmental organizations such as the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament have utilized EDMs to spotlight events or policy demands, drawing media attention and demonstrating parliamentary backing for disarmament objectives. Similarly, health advocacy groups have tabled EDMs to address conditions like Huntington's disease, targeting MPs for signatures to underscore the issue's priority and influence departmental responses. This signature-gathering dynamic not only records views but also fosters alliances among backbenchers, potentially amplifying voices on niche or contentious topics outside the government's legislative agenda.[19][20][6] The campaigning utility of EDMs extends to reputational signaling, where sponsoring MPs cultivate constituent goodwill by associating with locally resonant issues, as evidenced by analyses of backbench behavior in response to electoral pressures. Quantitative support metrics from EDMs can inform subsequent parliamentary tactics, such as questions or debates, though their non-binding nature limits direct enforceability. Critics within Parliament note that while effective for awareness-raising, EDMs' reliance on voluntary participation often results in uneven impact, with high-signature motions on emotive subjects—like electoral integrity, garnering 50 signatures in one 2016 case—gaining more traction than others. Overall, EDMs embody a low-cost, accessible tool for sustained advocacy, bridging individual MP initiative with organized external pressure.[17][21][4]Rare Instances of Leading to Debate or Action
While Early Day Motions are predominantly symbolic and rarely allocated time for debate in the House of Commons, exceptional cases have arisen where they have prompted formal discussion or tangible outcomes, typically through structured parliamentary mechanisms rather than ad hoc backbench initiative. These instances underscore the procedural rigidity limiting EDMs to expressive functions, with action ensuing only under specific rules, such as challenges to government confidence or secondary legislation.[13] A prominent example involved EDM 351, tabled on 22 March 1979 by Margaret Thatcher, which expressed no confidence in Her Majesty's Government. This motion was debated on 28 March 1979 and passed by a single vote, precipitating the resignation of Prime Minister James Callaghan and triggering a general election on 3 May 1979 that returned a Conservative majority. Such use of an EDM as a no-confidence vehicle represents a rare adaptation of the format for high-stakes constitutional purposes, leveraging its motion structure without a fixed debate day.[8] Another pathway for EDMs to yield debate occurs via "prayers" against negative-resolution statutory instruments, where an EDM annuls secondary legislation unless debated and upheld. Under Standing Order No. 118, these can be referred to Delegated Legislation Committees for scrutiny, though allocation of time remains discretionary. For instance, EDM 924 in the 2016-17 session, tabled by Liberal Democrat MP Norman Lamb on 28 March 2017, prayed against the Social Security (Personal Independence Payment) Regulations 2017 (S.I. 2017 No. 194), garnering cross-party support and leading to a committee debate on 13 April 2017 that highlighted implementation flaws, though the regulations were not annulled. Similarly, historical prayers, such as those against immigration rules in 2006 (S.I. 2006 No. 3223), have advanced to committee stages, occasionally influencing amendments or withdrawals. These cases, numbering fewer than a dozen annually amid thousands of instruments, illustrate EDMs' marginal role in legislative oversight, often amplifying backbench pressure without guaranteeing policy reversal.[22][23]Empirical Impact and Data Analysis
Quantitative Trends in Tabling and Signatures
The number of Early Day Motions (EDMs) tabled in the House of Commons has shown a marked decline in recent parliamentary sessions compared to historical averages. While earlier guides estimated an average of 2,000 to 3,000 EDMs per session based on approximately 10 tabled per sitting day, official sessional data indicate lower volumes in the 2010s and 2020s. For instance, 1,205 EDMs were tabled during the 2016–17 session, over 1,330 in the 2012–13 session (up to April 2013), but only 802 in the 2023–24 session.[1][24][25] This reduction aligns with broader observations of diminished backbench activity amid criticisms of EDMs as resource-intensive and low-impact.[4] Signatures on EDMs exhibit a highly skewed distribution, with the vast majority attracting minimal support and a small fraction gaining substantial backing. In an average session, most EDMs receive only 1 or 2 signatures, while around 70 to 80 exceed 100 signatures and 6 to 7 surpass 200. In 2023, the average number of signatures per EDM stood at 11, reflecting low overall engagement.[1][26] High-profile examples occasionally buck this trend; for instance, EDM 178 on a Climate Change Bill garnered 412 signatures shortly after the 2005 general election.[27]| Parliamentary Session | EDMs Tabled | Average Signatures per EDM (where reported) |
|---|---|---|
| 2012–13 (partial to Apr 2013) | >1,330 | Not specified |
| 2016–17 | 1,205 | Not specified |
| 2023–24 | 802 | 11 (2023 data) |