I would strongly suggest that Parliament would benefit from some sort of registry with regard to what internship programs are operating. This relates to Dr. Dance's comment that it would be helpful to ensure that interns have solid workplace experiences.
To give you a very practical example, I am usually in contact, like Dr. Dance before me, multiple times a year with people saying, “Oh, I need a reference from someone who has a parliamentary intern,” or the House of Commons administration itself saying, “We've been contacted by a parliamentary internship program; is it one of yours?” Because we are the largest and longest-running program, we have become in some ways the de facto keepers of that knowledge as to which other programs are there, but it is challenging because some will come, some will go, and the standards vary greatly.
There are also, at times, different extents of experiences promised that may or may not be delivered. There are American programs such as those at the University of Michigan and the University of Kentucky that place interns at Parliament.
What I would suggest as a potential model is what they do in the United Kingdom with their all-party caucus system. It isn't saying who should be involved but just that there needs to be a declaration that this exists. There needs to be some recognition that if you are claiming to be an internship program that places young people with MPs, there is a place where you have to declare and also say what the source of the funding is and what other activities you have. It would greatly promote the transparency without necessarily putting House of Commons officials into the position of being arbiters of what kind of program is beneficial.