Read on TwitterConclusions:
1/n
There was a fear last spring that without any mitigation like VP, the pandemic could adversely affect the work of the House, especially among older MPs, who need to shield for health reasons, as well as female MPs, who might face increase caring/familial responsibilities 2/n
One of the challenge in establishing the impact of VP on MPs behaviour, especially among older and female MPs, is the lack of a counterfactual: how would MPs behave if the House did not adopt VP during the pandemic?
3/n
3/n
However, the scope of VP changed through last year. During 1st wave of the pandemic, VP applied to both scrutiny and substantive business. This was restricted to scrutiny business in summer and autumn and only restore to original extent in Dec in response to the 2nd wave
4/n
4/n
We can therefore exploit this change to establish a causal impact of VP on MPs behaviour:
If VP are indeed benefitting female and older MPs more than other, we should observed that they are more active during phrase 1 & 3, in comparison to phrase 2
5/n
If VP are indeed benefitting female and older MPs more than other, we should observed that they are more active during phrase 1 & 3, in comparison to phrase 2
5/n
This graph shows number word spoken by backbench male(blue) and female(red) MPs in any week for the duration of this parliament (untill 18th Mar)
There is a clear drop in the number of words spoken by men in phrase 1 whilst there aren& #39;t notable impact on women MPs
6/n
There is a clear drop in the number of words spoken by men in phrase 1 whilst there aren& #39;t notable impact on women MPs
6/n
Similarly, number of words spoken by MPs aged 65 or above remain quite steady whilst there is a sharp drop of words spoken by younger MPs during phrase 1, but not during phrase 2 and 3
How about the contribution from women and older MPs as a proportion of all words spoken? There seems to be some moderate increase in proportion of words spoken by women and older MPs in phrase 3 but again the pattern is not very clear 7/n
To further look at individual level data, I ran a TS Poisson regression with MP and week FE. The result indicate that women MPs are indeed more active in phrase 1 in comparison to phrase 2 whilst older MPs aren& #39;t benefitting as much in phrase 1 but did catch up in phrase 3
8/n
8/n
A limitation of this study is that it focused on the effect of VP to what happen in the (virtual) chamber. It& #39;s possible that the benefit of VP may lie beyond the chamber i.e. enable MPs to do more in their constituency or for their families without affect their work as an MP
9/n
9/n
In conclusion, women MPs are benefitting more from VP, especially during phrase 1 of VP. But this seems to be mostly driven by male MPs shying away from participating in phrase 1 and the impact of VP on women MPs in phrase 3 is less significant.
10/n
10/n
For older MPs, VP didn& #39;t bring much benefit during phrase 1, esp among older male MPs. This could be due to a steeper learning curve in adopting to new technology among older MPs since they did catch up in the end and were more active in phrase 3 in comparison to phrase 1&2
11/n
11/n
In the end, these findings should inform the ongoing discussion about the future of VP in parliament post-covid. As VP do seems to have benefitted women and older MPs to participate in parliamentary proceeding, there is a case of keeping some form of VP in the long run.
12/n
12/n
