Written Parliamentary Questions

Status / emerging findings

• 75% of written questions reference FOI, with MPs strategically using both systems in sequence—suggesting WPQs alone are failing to extract government information
• Table Office applies 'factual basis' rule too restrictively, blocking legitimate questions based on government media briefings, while government departments deliberately provide evasive answers ('no plans to publish') rather than substantive responses
• WPQs lack any appeal mechanism, making them weaker than FOI requests despite theoretically broader scope; MPs increasingly abandon WPQs for FOI due to unreliable outcomes and slow responses
• Rising WPQ volumes are driven by poor response quality and government stonewalling, not AI or new MPs; named-day questions are being used as a workaround for indefinite delays from departments like Health and Social Care
• Information Commissioner's Office reports rising FOI complaint volumes; only 1–5% of FOI requests come from MPs, concentrated among a small number of highly active MPs

Why it matters

If government can reliably dodge parliamentary questions and force MPs into slower FOI processes, parliamentary accountability weakens and the public loses a fast, transparent channel to scrutinise power.

Tone arc

Started procedural (April: rule interpretation, workload management); shifted adversarial after Burghart and Chamberlain testimony accused government of deliberate obstruction; May sessions deepened into systemic critique—expert witnesses and ICO confirmed government departments are strategically withholding information to burden parliamentary scrutiny.

Key witnesses

Alex Burghart MP (Conservative shadow minister), Wendy Chamberlain MP (Liberal Democrat Chief Whip), Dr Ben Worthy (Birkbeck College, academic expert), Warren Seddon (Information Commissioner's Office), Alex Parsons (mySociety, civic charity), Jenna Corderoy (investigative journalist, Democracy for Sale UK), Table Office (correspondence parties)