Web users and internet experts have given a mixed response to the new-look parliamentary website.

The parliament.uk website, revealed in a "soft launch" as MPs headed off for the summer recess this week, has drawn criticism from some users but praise from others.

The redesigned site - which acts as an umbrella for a range of parliamentary bodies including the House of Commons and House of Lords - has come under fire for being "confusing", "too slow" and "unpleasant".

Since the creation of the Scottish parliament and devolved assemblies, critics have accused Westminster of failing to keep up to speed with the internet age.

But it has been given high praise from the British Web Design and Marketing Association, which said it was the "best example of open and accessible government" seen to date.

"We like pretty much everything about this site," said the BWDMA's Martin White. "Clearly a lot of thinking has gone into this site. We like the design, the clear structure, the layout and the harmonised colour."

White said the site has some technical problems which require attention, but praised it as a "significant step forward" in opening up politics to the people.

The decision to re-design parliament's website was taken by MPs and peers - although the tendering process and the delivery of the project was managed by parliamentary officials.

After the tendering process was completed, parliament handed the contract to Epic, a web firm with an annual turnover of £7 million which has previously worked with the Cabinet Office and several other government departments.

A spokesman for the House of Commons refused to say how much the re-design cost - describing the amount as "commercially confidential". Another Westminster official described the sums involved as "extremely modest".

Whilst MPs said they wanted to keep a lid on costs, it is thought that the bill for the changes, combined with a reconfiguration of the search engine, could be as much as £100,000.

Steve Rayson, head of government services at Epic, said the new-look site should appeal to a broader audience. He said the site had to meet the needs of several different groups of users, such as the media, the public, and MPs themselves.

"The information was there and expert users could find things fairly quickly," he said.

"But in design terms, when you think about different audiences and how you get to content, we have changed it quite considerably."

He said users could now narrow down searches a lot. "It's a huge project - there are over a million documents on the site," he added.

But he conceded that one of the problems was getting the Commons and the Lords to agree on the final designs.

Rayson added that any problems would be ironed out over the summer recess.

Rival web firms and users have, however, given a mixed welcome to the new look website.

Tom Maitland of Lewisfield Design Consultants, which built Michael Portillo's website, said the navigation was "simple and uncluttered" but was critical of the design.

"Although it cannot be overlooked that the primary function of this new website is to provide a resource centre to visitors who wish to quickly drill down to find information, the graphical environment in which this is achieved is a somewhat uninspiring place in which to exist.

"The design is clinically safe throughout, the main header, the only realistic area for creative flair is oppressive and does little to entice further progression," he said.

Maitland added that while the use of the most advanced web technologies may be out of place, "I can't help feeling a more human element is required to soften a site that feels more like an application".

Patrick Nethercot of PCRRN Internet Services, which has built websites for a number of MPs, welcomed the decision to redesign the site, but expressed concern that it may have initially made things worse.

Whilst he said the new site "looks nice" he said he found it "slower overall".

He also expressed concern that the new search facility was not up-to-speed.

Using the "advanced search" feature with his Netscape browser returned an error, and when using the same facility with Internet Explorer "the search page simply did not appear".

Further attempts to use the search suffered from slow downloads, said Nethercot.

When searching for one MP's name within a timeframe in which he knew the parliamentarian had spoken, Nethercot was told there were no search matches. "So not only is it very slow, it doesn't work," he said.

Darren Jones, the director of web designers AiGN which built the main Plaid Cymru party website, said designing a website for parliament was a tough job.

"A political website needs to appeal to both the public and media alike, and as such, is never an easy thing to design. Information must be readily available and easy to find, plus the site must be easy to navigate."

But he counselled parliament against using "the most up-to-date technology".

"On the one hand you'll have the world's news agencies accessing the site via huge bandwidths, and on the other, a member of the public using a dial-up modem transmitting at a low speed," he said.

"Parliament.uk carries a huge amount of information and it looks as though the redesign works reasonably well in terms of ease-of-use, although, personally, I find the colour scheme a little 'stiff' and uninspiring."

Mark O'Brien, a public affairs manager who tried in vain to access a recent select committee report into forestry, described the changes as "unsatisfactory".

"The new site is less easy to navigate and looks unpleasant and clumsy. It's much more difficult and time consuming to find the information you want - and then when you find it in this instance you can't access it," he said.

But Sir George Young, the web-aware Tory MP, said the site looked better and offered greater functionality. "As the chairman of the standards and privileges committee I am pleased that that the register of member's interests is now more readily accessible," he said.

Parliamentary officials have defended the decision to launch the new site before all the problems were ironed out.

"The site is still under development. The aim is to provide the benefits of the new site as soon as possible, rather than waiting until every single alteration has been made," said a Commons spokesman.

Epic's Rayson said there will be "regular reviews" based upon feedback from site users.