There was a Commons debate this week on making the Houses of Parliament more family-friendly. We’ve already covered the breastfeeding angle but it’s worth looking at some of the other issues raised.

Jo Swinson, in an article for the New Statesman, talked about what she thought was necessary to make Parliament more accessible for parents.

Lots of positive suggestions were put forward in the debate, including better scheduling of Parliamentary recesses to coincide with school holidays, more predictability of debates and votes, a drop-in crèche facility to complement the nursery, introducing maternity cover for MPs and compassionate carers’ leave for staff facing family emergencies. Rightly, the debate included family responsibilities beyond parenting, whether for elderly relatives or for partners who become ill. Professor Sarah Childs, the respected expert on gender and politics from Bristol University, is currently preparing recommendations for reform of Parliament to make it more accessible to people from under-represented groups, so it was a timely discussion.

She talked about the history-making change that had made a real difference to her and her husband when their son was born:

For me, the change John Bercow embraced as Speaker of the House of Commons to enable my husband or me to walk through the division lobby to vote while carrying our son, was really helpful for the many votes that happened when the Commons nursery had closed. I’m delighted that so many other MPs have now made use of this – and you know what, the sky hasn’t fallen in.

More changes are needed in Parliament, and in workplaces across the country, to ensure we do not lose out on talented people just because they become parents, or have family responsibilities. The business case for diversity is clear, now organisations have to change to reap the benefits.

In a Guardian article, Labour MP Rupa Huq talked about some of the problems she’d had:

 This week we’ve had a three-day recess as parliament has not sat, yet a fortnight ago it was half term. I was forced to bring my 11-year-old with me to work. I wasn’t the only one with a child in tow but I was met with dirty looks at every turn. When waiting in the chamber for several hours to speak in an all-day debate I asked if I could dive out to make sure my son had eaten and was told that I would invalidate my claim to speak if I did as “it’s about choices”. It seemed a particular slap in the face given that we were debating tax credits which were supposed to allow people to work and where cuts will hit women hardest. I was finally called to speak when it was getting on for 7pm.

The right of parents to demand flexible working arrangements has been legislated for by parliament, but parliament seems to be one workplace where this does not apply. Flexibility in the face of a whipping system is a surefire collision course. Add in weekend constituency engagements and it’s a 24/7 job. It’s an incredible privilege, but incompatible with any decent work-life balance.

Some reforms have been introduced, such as a nursery for pre-schoolers and fewer late nights, but there are some males who openly mourn the good old days when the Commons routinely sat until 1am every day, and want to turn the clock back.

The Scottish Parliament was supposed to be family friendly but it’s not really. Kezia Dugdale said this week at the Who runs the World? conference in Edinburgh that one of her MPs had had real trouble when the parliamentary timetable was altered at the last minute. What where they supposed to do about their precariously balanced childcare arrangements?

If we want Parliament to be representative of the society it serves,  it needs to buck up its ideas, make itself more family friendly and set an example to other organisations.

* Caron Lindsay is Editor of Liberal Democrat Voice and blogs at Caron's Musings