The initiative is the latest in a series of petitions highlighting concerns over accountability at Westminster. It follows another widely supported campaign calling for a ban on alcohol in House of Commons venues, reflecting mounting public dissatisfaction with standards of conduct among elected representatives.
Petition calls for legally enforceable duties
Created by Caroline Hurst, the petition argues that relying on parliamentary convention alone is no longer sufficient to ensure MPs fulfil the responsibilities they were elected—and paid—to perform.
The petition states that MPs, whose salaries are funded by taxpayers, should be subject to statutory rules requiring them to attend Parliament and remain active within their constituencies. Supporters believe stronger legal mechanisms are needed to hold MPs accountable when they fail to meet those obligations.
Notably, the proposal does not demand a specific number of sitting days, constituency surgeries or working hours. Instead, it calls for Parliament to establish a legally binding minimum standard of attendance and public engagement, replacing the current system that depends largely on political convention.
How the current system works
Under existing rules, there is no legal requirement for MPs to attend Westminster a minimum number of times or spend a set amount of time serving their constituencies.
While MPs must swear an oath of allegiance after being elected and comply with the House of Commons Code of Conduct, these rules primarily govern ethics, financial transparency and personal behaviour. They do not impose mandatory attendance or constituency presence.
As a result, MPs who rarely appear in Parliament or seldom meet constituents face no formal legal sanction. In practice, accountability comes through party discipline and, ultimately, the ballot box at the next general election.
Critics argue that this approach leaves significant gaps. General elections can be as much as five years apart, safe seats often shield underperforming MPs from electoral consequences, and many voters lack clear information about how actively their representatives perform their duties between elections.
Why the campaign is attracting attention
The petition was launched in April 2026 and surpassed the 10,000-signature milestone on 26 May. Its rise coincided with a series of high-profile political controversies that intensified public debate over transparency and standards in public office.
In recent months, Westminster has faced criticism over issues ranging from MPs drinking before important parliamentary votes to wider concerns about political accountability. These controversies have fuelled calls for stronger oversight and clearer rules governing the conduct of elected officials.
The petition reflects a broader belief among many voters that self-regulation within Parliament is no longer enough. Whether the issue is attendance, constituency work or behaviour inside Westminster, supporters argue that voluntary conventions should be replaced by enforceable legal standards to ensure MPs meet the responsibilities expected of them.
With more than 13,800 signatures already secured, campaigners hope the petition will continue to gain momentum in the coming months. Reaching the 100,000-signature mark would not automatically change the law, but it would significantly increase political pressure by opening the door to a parliamentary debate on whether mandatory attendance rules should become part of the UK’s constitutional framework.