MAJOR changes to the Parliamentary day have prompted widespread criticism, with some people claiming MPs want to start work earlier so they can get to the theatre on time.

Supporters of the move by Robin Cook MP, leader of the House of Commons, argue that the traditional late starts are from another era, when MPs still ran their own businesses in the mornings.

Political editor Bill Jacobs spoke to two East Lancashire MPs with differing views on the move...

Janet Anderson, MP for Rossendale and Darwen:

"The headlines were predictable. 'MPs vote on deal to give themselves more time off,' screamed the Daily Mail. 'Storm as lazy MPs vote on 3 day week,' said The Sun.

This referred to the decision by MPs to 'modernise' the House of Commons. Many of the changes I support and over the year as a whole, they do not represent a reduction in hours worked, whatever the Mail and the Sun may say.

Finishing at 6 pm on a Thursday will help us all to get back to our constituencies that evening. What I certainly do not agree with is the new 11.30 am start (currently 2.30pm) and 7pm finish (currently 10 pm) on Tuesdays and Wednesdays.

When I stood as a Parliamentary candidate, I knew that, should I be elected, I would be expected to represent my constituents in Parliament during what was not a "normal" working day. I knew that sometimes I would have to be in Parliament late at night. As Gerald Kaufman MP said in the debate: 'There is no way we will ever turn this House of Commons into a rational organisation comparable to other work places... This is a House of Parliament. It is not a sausage machine or a conveyor belt... '

Gerald is right. Most of us have fought hard to become MPs, largely because, believe it or not, we wanted to improve the quality of life for our constituents.

Mine, in Rossendale and Darwen, did not elect me to Westminster so that I could sign off early each evening to go to the theatre. Much valuable business is done in the evenings. Ministers, who have been in their Departments all day, come to the House to vote and we raise constituency matters with them personally. On those mornings when the House does not sit, we can show constituents around Parliament.

MPs who supported the changes say they are family friendly. The stark truth is they are family friendly for London MPs but the rest of us can hardly get back to our families on Tuesdays and Wednesdays and return to the Commons for 11.30 the next morning. Being an MP is a well paid and privileged job. It has never been a 9 - 5 job, and nor should it be. Let us hope the House will eventually see the error of its ways and give us back a Parliament that works."

Burnley MP Peter Pike, a member of the Commons Modernisation Committee which drew up the controversial proposals:

"The change of hours in the modernisation proposals agreed earlier last week are an important part of a package of improvements in the way the Commons works.

As a member of the Modernisation Committee I believe it will improve the way we work and scrutinise legislation and act on behalf of our constituents. I don't think that for many of us it will reduce the hours we work.

Most MPs work over 60 hours a week and I regularly do well above that figure.

What do the new hours do? They effectively end Friday sittings except for Private Members Bills and I want to look at the possibility of moving them to a Wednesday evening after 7pm. This would mean I can be virtually sure of being in Burnley on a Friday and accept commitments/meetings etc on this basis. The earlier finish on Thursday by one hour makes it easier to get North on the Thursday - and even do it by train! That again helps plan a full day of commitments in Burnley on the Friday. It enables me to visit factories, meet industries, schools etc who want to see me on a working day for them.

Mondays we have left unchanged and start at 2.30pm. An early start would have meant in reality that Northern members would have to go to London on the Sunday instead of travelling down on the Monday.

What do the changes on Wednesday and Thursday do? They bring the sitting day forward by 3hours. Questions will start at 11.30am and major statements will be at 3.30 and the main debates starting earlier in the day. The key votes will be at 7pm instead of 10pm surely a more sensible hour? Members will adjust their working day and once in operation I am sure we will find the changes advantageous. I know that in my case it will mean I will vote at 7pm then eat and could still attend meetings, briefings etc.

After that I will as always get round to dealing with mail that at the moment I will have done earlier in the day. Some members may get home but surely when most MP's are now very much full time members it is time to move away from hours designed for those to make their money on the stock exchanges or in the legal system.

Parliament has to be more relevant and who believes it was ever in the best interests of the country to have all night sittings. Better planned recesses will enable us to do our two part job in London and in our constituency better and I am sure it is an important step in making Parliament more relevant and able to do the job better.