Is keeping the way MPs vote secret really the way to reform Parliament?

There’s an intriguing detail in today’s widely welcomed proposals for reforming how the House of Commons works. In a bid to weaken the power of the whips and to strengthen that of backbenchers of all parties, the House of Commons Reform Committee has recommended that MPs vote in secret for a new body that will control some of the business in the House.

Secret voting would reduce the influence of the whips certainly, but it would also reduce accountability to the public. It’s not hard to imagine a controversial decision by this new body – or a controversial election to it – resulting in a wave of anger about secret votes by MPs.

Using secrecy to protect the independence of Parliamentarians was an approach taken in post-1945 Italy, where for several decades the details of Parliamentary voting were kept secret. This was in reaction to the strong arm tactics that had been previously used by fascists in order to get Parliamentarians to toe the line.

Added to John Bercow’s recent Speaker election being the first to be done by secret ballot, it is at best a weird irony that the clamour for reform and transparency is leading Parliament in part down the road of secrecy. At worst it is storing up another storm of criticism when the secret processes produced an unpopular result.