What I learned about my 3,500 MPs’ staff colleagues

Georgina Kester-Harrison MBE, Former Chair of the Members and Peers Staff Association (MAPSA)

Imagine if you will an organisation with its headquarters in central London, and some 650 branches across the UK, each run by a business manager, employing in total circa 3,500 full and part-time staff.

Then imagine all staff needing to be fully conversant in every conceivable profession, from accountant to counsellor, policy expert and speech writer, to social worker and housing officer.

Only now can you come close to truly appreciating the role of an MP’s staffer.

The office

When people ask how an MP’s office operates, they are always surprised by the answer.

The honest response is “differently”. There is no one-size-fits-all approach, even though perhaps there should be.

Each MP runs their office as an individual business and all of them come with a different skill set, often not involving HR or office management.

The common denominator across all 650 offices is the staff. Fiercely loyal and passionate about what they do, they recognise the privilege and honour of working in these roles and do their best to ensure every office functions properly.

Many members of the general public are not familiar with the workings of an MP’s office. They have never really considered the mechanism of Westminster and are not aware that every MP is required to be in the House of Commons from Monday to Thursday evening.

MPs can only appear to be in two places at once because their staff are their trusted voice, answering phone enquiries, researching and resolving casework, scanning local issues, and ensuring every constituent receives the support they require.

How many times have we all heard the retort, when explaining the MP isn’t in that particular office: “Oh! So, they are off having a jolly somewhere, probably claiming expenses for it too.”

I was privileged enough to work in Westminster for over 14 years.

I had a fantastic boss and incredible team, but the job was nothing like I thought it would be despite having been involved in politics in previous roles.

I could have earned twice as much in the private sector and yet I stayed year after year, because I believed in what we did and was proud of what we achieved.

I was lucky – others are not.

Wanting to do what I could to correct this imbalance, I took on the voluntary role of Chair of the Members’ and Peers’ Staff Association (MAPSA) to facilitate, alongside other groups and unions, change for staff, wherever they worked, and to act as their voice.

The staff

As indicated, the true job description for a top-quality Parliamentary staffer would include many of the following attributes and skills:

• speech writer

• accountant

• HR manager

• counsellor

• therapist

• advocate

• diary manager

• tour guide

• travel coordinator

• policy expert

• database manager

• social media expert and communications expert

• website manager

• events organiser and more

Many would say I am exaggerating the role – one person can’t be expected to fill all those criteria, and the job is unreasonable.

Sadly though, that is the reality and while speaking to colleagues the same phrases come up again and again:

“More than just a desk job.”

“I’m a jack of all trades, master of none.”

“It’s nothing like I thought it would be.”

“I do anything and everything to allow my MP to do his job.”

“The job is great, I love it. I just can’t afford it.”

Yet the applications flood in for every job advertised because working in Parliament is an invaluable grounding for many external roles.

Some staff will go on to stand as MPs, while others will become Government Affairs Managers or work in PR, journalism, thinktanks and NGOs.

But should we be expecting people to fulfil all these roles, and do they get the support, salary and training while they do it?

The answer is no.

While many MPs are good employers who do their best to pay fairly, provide training and career progression where possible, the reality is that in an office of four or five people, with increasing workloads, these opportunities are limited.

Staff are resilient and many find their own coping mechanisms, forming close friendships with others on their corridors and bonding over a drink in the Sports & Social bar or Red Lion pub.

However, constituency staff do not necessarily have this ready-made community and can feel disconnected from Westminster as a result of their remote working locations.

All staff rely heavily on WhatsApp groups and Teams meetings for contacts and advice.

Support and community

Peer support is invaluable in a job where confidentiality is paramount, so organisations like MAPSA and the unions, all run by staff in a voluntary capacity, are essential. They reach out to those who may lack the confidence to throw themselves into the social scene, or those working for MPs who do not allow training or fraternising with other offices.

Unbelievably, this is still a reality in some offices.

Not long ago, a staffer contacted me in tears to ask if he could chat about the disciplinary process he was facing. It transpired he was 18 and this was his first ever job. His office was in an isolated part of the Parliamentary Estate, he had only met the MP at his interview and the Office Manager was only in one day a week.

Wanting to do the best job possible and trying to act on his own initiative, he had made an error in something he was asked to do. It wasn’t a major mistake and, with the right support and training, should never have happened. His job was terminated anyway, and he left Parliament vowing never to return.

Since the introduction of the Members’ and Members’ Staff Services Team (MMSST) in Parliament, staff have been able to access a network of their contemporaries, as well as the people and services of the House.

This has been invaluable, but ultimately the only person who can mandate change in an office is the MP. Should that still be the case?

There is no compulsory induction for staff wherever they work, but in Westminster this should, at the very least, be essential for the basic operations of the Estate and how to use the many resources available to staff.

IPSA sets terms and conditions for salaries, notice periods, pensions and contracts. Should there not be a similar requirement for it and other House departments to ensure MPs are running their offices effectively?

Checking they are conducting proper recruitment/HR processes, staff are being fairly remunerated for the work they are doing and receiving sufficient and relevant training, while still acknowledging that the MP remains the ultimate employer?

Hiring an office manager with no budgetary experience and then asking them to annually manage over £350,000 of public money is a recipe for disaster.

Similarly, expecting caseworkers to deal with distressing and harrowing cases with no support, counselling or prior warning this could be part of the role, is unfair and potentially unsafe. Yet it happens time and time again.

We owe it to staff, MPs and constituents to rethink how some offices operate to ensure they are providing the best service available.

Staffers told me:

“I had no idea that people brought such problems to their MP since we are not the right ‘service’ for anything, but we are the last port of call when people are in distress and if we can help, we always do try.”

“The majority of casework that comes in is not within an MP’s remit, let alone their staff. Most cases need referring to the local authority or suggesting that they seek independent legal counsel. There is a widespread misunderstanding about what an MP can and cannot help you with, and until this is redressed, casework will seldom be manageable. It's also worth noting that MPs and their staff face considerable abuse from constituents who turn to them for help that they fundamentally cannot render.”

Perception and abuse

In 2009, the public image of MPs changed dramatically following the expenses scandal.

Duck houses, moat cleaning, dog food and second homes – everyone was tarred with the same brush regardless of whether they had committed an offence of not.

Sixteen years later it remains an ongoing issue.

Local and national press, social media and the general public never fail to raise the issue at every available opportunity, and it quickly becomes very wearing.

“Are you going to put that on expenses?” is a regular retort MPs and their staff get used to hearing.

It’s an easy one to brush aside and to point them to IPSA’s website where further information on the costs MPs can and can’t claim are available. However not everyone reads the information and some wilfully don’t want to hear the truth.

It would be nice if this was the only negative commentary MPs’ offices had to cope with. Regrettably, with the rise in electronic communication and social media came an increase in abuse.

Threatening behaviour is not tolerated, and extreme threats are sent to the police, but it doesn’t stop them being received and read, often by the staff before the MP.

These are just a couple of examples of abusive emails sent to MPs in their original form:

“Couldn’t have happened to a worse politician and human being. I sincerely hope you crawl back under the rock from which you came and we never have to suffer your arrogance and incompetence again.”

“I hope someone sends Margaret’s Thatcher’s skull crushed up through your letterbox you nationalist scumbag bastard.” [sic]

Staff receive abusive phone calls, letters and emails, in person at surgeries or just going about their daily business.

The tragic deaths of Sir David Amess and Jo Cox are never far from their minds.

While they continue to meet constituents and help them wherever possible, the toll it takes on them should not be underestimated. Whenever an MP votes for, or against, a contentious policy the messages flood in and, because they care, staff try to shield their MP from some of the worst of it.

On one occasion I was awake at three in the morning removing emails from the inbox because my boss, in his capacity as Chief Whip, had made a controversial decision. He was exhausted and emotionally drained from the experience and this was a little thing I could choose to do to help, so he didn’t see a barrage of abuse when he first logged into his emails the next day. I would report the death threats and show him them later in the day. We would probably have a laugh about some of the choice language used, but only when the time was right.

This happens in the majority of offices, often on a regular basis where the MP is high profile or public facing, but for others it can be as the result of a local decision or a constituent not liking the answer they have been given.

No one should ever have to face this level of abuse while carrying out their daily role.

Greater training, professional support and guidance are essential, and MPs need to be reminded it is their responsibility as an employer to ensure the welfare of their staff. This is vital if we want to attract the best people to work for MPs, and also retain them.

Moving forward

The vast majority of MPs’ staff members are extraordinary people.

They deserve every accolade available for what they achieve and for their dedication and devotion to Parliament.

However, we owe it to each and every one of them to take the time to understand what resources and finances their offices need, and to acknowledge the individual pressures and requirements that may not be immediately apparent.

Staff are experts at “making do”. When supporting such vital work, that shouldn’t be the answer.

My time as MAPSA Chair was emotional, exhausting and heartbreaking, often leaving me wrung out and distressed by how little I could influence. Parliament appears to move at a glacial pace where change is concerned. However, it does move, and staff must continue to call out bad behaviour, to work with the House, IPSA and the ICGS, and affect change. This takes courage, but given all the other attributes staff already possess, what is one more?

A total of 2,023 people working for MPs lost their jobs at the 2024 General Election, but an equal or greater number replaced them.

Now is the perfect opportunity to ensure theirs is the best Parliamentary employment experience yet.