THE latest focus on Westminster rekindles an issue that I have argued about for years: the care of MPs’ members of staff and how they are employed.

Currently, MPs are given an allowance that is used to pay staff. Most of my staff are in Kidderminster and I have one assistant in London. However, as with all MPs, they are employed by me personally. IPSA, the financial organisation that runs MPs’ financial affairs, may take on the payroll function, but they do not take on the many functions that an HR department would run.

A staff member at any significant organisation will expect proper support from HR. That includes proper supervision, regular holiday entitlement, regular appraisals, a programme for continued professional development (CPD), an appeals process and a complaints process. If a staff member has an issue with his or her boss, they should have way of raising it. After all, people don’t always get along and a simple internal transfer may suffice. More serious problems can be tackled swiftly. Similarly, an organisation will have a central standard of the type of worker, and their skills, that they want.

The current situation means that someone wanting to work in Parliament for an MP must find a job with a specific MP. As MPs, we need to cover all the HR functions and it is not something that many of us will have experience in doing. Whilst there is an HR support organisation for us, it is sadly too often the case that their skills are called on at the later stage of an issue. For an MP, it means that we may find an ideal candidate for a job, but run the risk of being accused of favouritism for one reason or another. MPs are personally responsible for employment claims against them. This is a hopeless system where everyone loses. Parliament is a large organisation, but for staff, it is built like a network of 650 microbusinesses.

In the same way that IPSA has taken on the expenses roll in Parliament, a central employment organisation needs to be established. Staff can be assured of support, training, a place to raise complaints. They can apply for a job to the central system and the system can find them an appropriate MP. If an MP wants to employ someone specifically, the central organisation has to be satisfied that the prospective employee meets the pre-set standards. Everyone is protected.

Parliament is an institution that is rich in tradition and history, but it cannot be the case that the place where employment law is debated and changed is the place where such an archaic system still exists for MPs’ staff.