IT is one of the ironies of the British Parliament that it is some of those things which make the least sense to the outsider looking in that actually make the system work.

One of the problems facing the Government in trying to 'modernise' parliament is that removing some of the old-fashioned procedures may actually stop the system from working as it should.

Bill Wiggin, aged 34 and newly elected to parliament as MP for Leominster in June, expected to find its more archaic rituals frustrating.

But as an opposition backbencher, he says he has found some of these parliamentary oddities invaluable in helping have his voice heard on behalf of constituents.

Last month he used legislation which dates from the reign of William and Mary to get answers to questions about travellers in Ledbury and funding for the police.

This involved petitioning parliament by leaving a written question in a box on the back of the Speaker's chair. If it is presented in the right way, the petitioner is entitled to have an answer to his question.

Having represented the Malvern area at Westminster for 27 years, Sir Michael Spicer, now chairman of the influential Conservative 1922 Committee, is well placed to know what makes parliament work.

"The messiness of parliament, in a paradoxical way, allows for surprise," he says.

The element of surprise and being able to frustrate the Government's timetable is the biggest weapon in the armoury of an opposition or Government backbenchers in giving an otherwise all-powerful executive pause for thought.

At present the House of Commons opens for business at 2.30pm and, except on Thursdays, debates usually finish by 10pm. But events are never totally predictable.

Talk of moving to 9am-5pm business hours, with the timetable being tightly controlled by Government whips, causes Sir Michael great concern.

"If it becomes totally predictable that the Government will get its work through, it leads to a Government that doesn't have to think too deeply about what it does," he says.

He is equally defensive of the importance of Prime Minister's Question Time, the weekly bear pit that some argue brings Parliament into disrepute.

As her private secretary he was well-placed to see how much thought Margaret Thatcher had to put into the then twice weekly grilling at the hands of parliament.

"It was good that the chief executive of the country twice a week had to really think through what the Government was up to and answer for it," he says.

The difficulty for parliament is that its oddities do give the impression of its being a select gentlemen's club with rules only the privileged few can understand, which in view of the turnout at the last General Election should give MPs cause for concern.

Lord Temple-Morris, recently elevated to the House of Lords after 27 years as MP for Leominster, describes it as "the best club in London".

He says one change that would boost the role of the House of Commons would be to limit the power of the whips.

Lord Temple Morris had his own bad experience of the wrath of the whips office when he switched parties from Conservative to Labour and they tried to take his office from him.

Twenty years ago, he says, the Commons was a mix of gentlemen, the traditional 'knights of the shires' who were there to represent their constituency and were not concerned about having a ministerial career, and players.

"Now everyone wants to be a player," he says, and with future promotion as the carrot that gives whips the whip hand.

He would have the chairman of select committees chosen by the Commons and their salaries increased to cabinet minister level. This would boost the independence of backbenchers by creating a career path that was not dependent on party patronage.

Lord Temple Morris is against an elected House of Lords.

"We badly need phase two reform but a wholly elected house would quickly challenge the Commons and that should remain supreme," he says.

He would have an elected element, say 20 per cent indirectly elected from the regions and would increase the number of nominees, the so-called 'people's peers'. He would also make sure no party could ever have a majority.

Bill Wiggin says the Lords could be made a "retirement home for MPs".

"An MP now can be thrown out after just five years and having learnt the techniques for getting things done in the House that experience is wasted."