Work experience, voluntary placements or internships – all are unpaid. Some provide expenses to cover lunch and travel, but the work is free.
In theory, this seems appropriate. Work that is unpaid ensures that a student or graduate applies because of a genuine interest in politics and belief in the party, not a financial incentive. Administratively too, this makes sense – without the legal requirements that come with providing a salary, the positions can be more flexible and tailored informally to the student or graduate in question.
In practice, however, this system presents two problems. At a basic level, it is unfair. Any student or graduate who is working for an MP should be paid.
The majority of interns work exceptionally hard, and it is right to be financially rewarded for this.
Yet, the system of unpaid work experience creates an ever greater issue. The absence of a salary means that only students who either live in London, or who are able to afford to pay for accommodation and living expenses, volunteer in Westminster. This means that the House of Commons is flooded by interns who come from the same socioeconomic and geographical background, and the vast majority of young students and graduates outside of London hoping to begin careers in politics find it much more difficult.
On w4mp now there is an advertisement for a voluntary placement for one MP, with the salary ‘expenses only’. Even in the description, it is written: ‘would particularly suit a student living or studying within commuting distance to Wesminster.’
Moreover, jobs in the Westminster offices of MPs are often given to those who have interned there before. This means that MPs have a tendency to hire people from the same background, and it helps perpetuate the perception of social elitism and the lack of diversity in Westminster.
Providing interns with a salary would also make the Labour party significantly more appealing than the other parties to the young generation with an interest in politics. Positions would be extremely competitive, and the quality and number of applicants may rise even higher.
Such a measure would probably require a formalisation of the process of recruiting interns, though I believe this would actually be a positive step. Work would be more structured and reliable, and using formal recruitment processes like going through universities could outsource the work required in organising work experience and internships.
Logistically, I believe there are a number of ways to make payment for interns feasible. The option I consider to be the most practical is extending the allowances MPs receive to cover the costs of running an office and employing staff. The Review Body on Senior Salaries is responsible for determining MPs’ pay and amount paid in allowances. I would suggest SSRB acknowledge the amount required to support paid internships in setting the level of allowances, in particular the maximum staffing expenditure, for the offices of MPs. The added benefit of having internships funded by the public sector is that it will help to ensure consistency and prevent party competition; if parties funded the internships a scenario might arise that saw one party offering higher pay to intern in an office than another party.
Of course, paying the work experience girl or boy seems like a minor issue in the world of rising unemployment and brutal cuts. Moreover, given the jobs crisis currently faced by graduates, work experience in Westminster is extremely competitive, and with the amount of applications MPs receive a change may appear unnecessary. However, I am confident such a measure would be easy to implement, have a range of benefits and would symbolise the fundamental ideals of the Labour party, with a commitment to accessibility and fair pay for work done. At a time when students are about to be forced into paying expensive tuition fees and when graduates face a crisis in finding a job, establishing a system of payment for interns would be a public declaration of commitment to help counter the forces against them.