Comments on: Parliament and politics

By: Citizen Responsible

Citizen Responsible — Sun, 24 May 2009 14:04:28 +0000

It could be worse, it could be Berlusconi. I would have thought Germany would favour a president from a country in the Euro zone. It says no one is keener on a permanent EU president than Mrs Merkel. There are federal elections in Germany in September and Mrs Merkel’s coalition government could come unstitched. In which case, she might also be an EU presidential candidate.

By: Javelin

Javelin — Sun, 24 May 2009 07:19:58 +0000

Before the House starts to reform itself the expense abusers need to step down. For the same reason you cannot have an expense abuser as the new speaker you cannot have expense abuser voting on expenses. John you are right to separate Party from Parliament. An MP shouldn’t touch a Government blog (such as the Milliboys brief effort)- they should be touched by civil servants. Press officers should be limited to FOI requests from the press and not political announcements or spin. FOI should be the rule not an exception.

By: colin

colin — Sun, 24 May 2009 01:18:52 +0000

The three main parties all refuse to listen to the opinions of the electorate on the E.U..Without that it is nonesense to talk as though we live in a democracy.With senior politicians drawing large benefits from the E.U.,Kinnock,Mandelson , Blair waiting hopefully in the wings and dear knows how many others,the interests of the country are ignored and indeed only the Irish voters have been allowed to express an opinion.The corruption involved in the M.P.’s expenses scandal is only a part of a much more serious situation that needs to be tackled.Cameron does not show any sign of realising this.

By: Duncan

Duncan — Sun, 24 May 2009 01:18:26 +0000

What you say is interesting but I’m not sure how you can draw the line. Part of an MPs job is to formulate and vote on policy. Different political parties will have different policies, parliament is the place where these are debated. If an opposition MP informs constitutents about their opinion on policy and voting intentions I’m not sure if I see a dividing line between parliament and politics. If you’re appealing for votes or attacking rival candidates in your constituency then that’s political but it must be a judgement call to some extent. I think the most people are able to make those judgements. I personally want my MP to be as well informed as possible. I want them to have the best satellite system to pick up news from around the world. I want them to have teams of researchers investigating the latest data on every policy issue imaginable. That I don’t mind paying for. I object to kitkats.

Reply: Yes, I understand. The issue is where do you draw the political line? Presumably the taxpayer should not pay for political leaflets sent out to encourage people to vote. The point I am making is that the current system tries to draw a line quite tightly.

By: hughev

hughev — Sat, 23 May 2009 22:10:03 +0000

on your blogroll Nadine Dorries has disappeared. oh well, just a few months early. isn’t it dreadful how the general public(the voters)can be so ungrateful as to vote out hardworking members when given the chance.
God, the stress the MP’s have been put under. now enjoy the same tactics you have used on GP’s for 6 years. At least they work for their emoluments

By: jailhouselawyer

jailhouselawyer — Sat, 23 May 2009 21:45:48 +0000

I am glad that you have finally got the message that Parliament has got something to do with politics. But we don’t know just what yet.

By: backofanenvelope

backofanenvelope — Sat, 23 May 2009 19:31:31 +0000

It seems to me that the first and most important change we need is to separate Parliament and the government.

By: Mike Stallard

Mike Stallard — Sat, 23 May 2009 18:49:08 +0000

Lady Di was “the People’s Princess”. Our Tony was “the People’s choice”. The Big Tent was open to anyone and it was therefore the People’s Party. That is why Our Tony threatened to destroy the Tories for ever: they were not anything to do with the People, just Toffs.
So the People’s party was right to take the people’s money and use it for the people’s things.

This idea is very dangerous and you are right to question it.
Too bad the BBC and the Labour Party don’t read your website!

By: A Griffin

A Griffin — Sat, 23 May 2009 16:47:33 +0000

Milgram’s experiment helps me understand some elements of the MP’s expenses.The social environment encouraged the claiming. It was and is mainly a moral issue not a legal one, as were the bank credit excesses. It all flourished because groups of people found ways of behaving which encouraged more of the same. We live in a society where it is very difficult to be a lone voice let alone a whistle blower.The expenses saga was part of the bubble. There is a big moral backlash going on that is a regection of ‘show’ and material wealth as being how we value everything. The only way out for parliament and society is to find a way of rewading different views which encourage healthy debate.This would build natural breaks into the system. Perhaps proper debating needs to be taught in all schools rather than just how to eat healthily etc. Parliament has ceased to be a proper debating chamber, there was no emotional reward, so some just took the cash and lifestyle. If you look at John Redwoods education and career to date, it is clear to me that he has given up a great chance to make much more money in the private sector, in order to contribute to the political debate that tries to help the country. Others are quietly doing the same in all walks of public life. Not all MP’s are worth their pay and expenses but some are actually worth a lot more!

By: Brian Tomkinson

Brian Tomkinson — Sat, 23 May 2009 15:52:03 +0000

Does anyone still believe in democracy? It is difficult when you read stories such as this in The Times online headlined: World Agenda: EU prepares to welcome President Tony Blair

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/world_agenda/article6341560.ece?openComment=true

What do the Conservative party think about that outrageous appointment and what will/can you do to stop it?

Incidentally your MEP colleague Daniel Hannan has written that in readiness for the introduction of the Lisbon Treaty: “18 (additional) unconstitutional or “phantom” Euro-MPs will be elected anyway and will draw their full salaries and allowances. The only concession to the letter of law is that they won’t be allowed to vote. In other words – in an almost perfect metaphor for the entire Euro-system – they will be paid without having any function.”
So much for the will of the people!