Yesterday marked the 750th anniversary of the UK's first Parliament. Rob Merrick examines changing attitudes to politicians over the years

THE other day, I read yet another article about the public’s “growing cynicism about Parliament” – which, it argued, is the “dominant mood" in British politics over recent years.

This piece urged MPs to wake up to their “unpopularity”, pointing to the “bored or the bewildered who stayed at home”, rather than bother to vote at elections.

Sound familiar? Probably – but the twist is this article was written in 1959, by future Labour leader Michael Foot, incidentally, back in a supposed golden era for Britain.

It reminded me that little is new under the sun and that the notion of a sadly-lost time when politicians were respected, admired and applauded by the voters is surely a myth?

Nevertheless, what better day to examine the state of our democracy than on the 750th anniversary of the first Parliament ever established in this country, way back in 1265?

This Parliament was established by Simon de Montfort, the Earl of Leicester, a French noble who came to England in the 1230s and was given lands by Henry III - only to later rebel and defeat him.

To gather support, de Montfort summoned – on January 20, 1265 - not only barons and knights, but also “two citizens from every borough in England”, the first time they had sat in a Parliament.

Later that year, De Montford was killed by Royalists, his head was chopped off and “his testicles cut off and hung on either side of his nose”, according to some accounts.

More happily, the idea of inviting representatives – as well as knights – had become the norm by the 14th Century, hence the man is often called the founder of the Commons.

And yesterday (Tuesday, January 20) – dubbed ‘Democracy Day’– saw a determined effort by the BBC to commemorate the 750th anniversary by explaining the work of Parliament and suggesting change.

So, what sort of Parliament do we have three-quarters of a Millennium after the “burgesses” – the freemen of the major towns – made their first appearance here?

Clearly, it’s not a popular and respected Parliament, and, yes, it’s a lot less popular and respected than the one 56 years ago.

A graph measuring the proportion of voters “satisfied” with MPs runs at a steady but unspectacular 35-40 per cent, before it falls off a cliff at the end of the last decade.

The reason is well-known – the expenses scandal that exposed many MPs with their hands in the till. A handful went to prison and the careers of many more ended in disgrace.

That was five years ago, but the controversy is still raw in voters’ minds – not surprisingly, when it can bite back to force the resignation of Culture Secretary Maria Miller, as it did last year.

No doubt it still feeds into the polls showing huge numbers of people protesting that MPs “are not trustworthy and fail to keep promises”, “follow the party line” and are “not representative of the public”.

Well, the editor pays me to watch Westminster every day – so I’m the first person to admit MPs can be annoying and pompous and Parliament frustrating and obstructive.

It is alarming that our representatives remain so male, pale and privileged.

No less than 35 per cent are privately-educated, against seven per cent for the population as a whole. One in eight were private sector consultants, while far fewer worked in education (five per cent) or health (four per cent).

And don’t get me started on Prime Minister’s questions and those brown-nosing queries to discover “whether the Prime Minister is pleased that unemployment is falling in my constituency”.

But there is another side to Parliament in 2015 – a far more encouraging side, where I can identify clear improvements during my years in the press gallery.

Contrary to complaints that MPs “follow the party line”, they have never been more rebellious, a consequence of greater pressure from voters to stand up for their constituencies.

You may not like David Cameron’s flip-flopping on the European Union – I think it’s bad for Britain – but it flows from his backbenchers asserting their power over him.

Similarly, the workings of Parliament have received a kick up the backside. Speaker John Bercow can be an irritating bore, but he is passionate about dragging the old place into the 21st Century.

Hence, more and more ministers are dragged to the despatch box to answer ‘urgent questions’ on big issues and troublesome MPs are called to their feet.

Those changes are on the back of more powerful select committees, with independent heads. Remember the way Rupert Murdoch was ordered to appear – and was humbled?

Every week, I see ordinary people roll up outside, to lobby their MPs, to attend campaign meetings, to protest, because they believe it can make a difference.

So, 750 years after Simon de Montfort summoned an identifiable Parliament for the first time, give the place a fresh look. There’s room for optimism.