“Too little time”

Once again our part time Parliament had to rush the task in hand. Only three hours was allowed yesterday for the debate about the public’s right to know what its government is doing. There was no chance of being called for many MPs wanting to speak, and even interventions were strongly rationed by Miss Harman and others.

It was yet another irony, that on a day when some of us wanted to talk about the need for the government to be freer with more informaiton, they decided yet again to prevent us having time to discuss it. A few loyal Labour backbenchers even had the temerity to argue no-one was interested in which documents we are allowed to see about the government’s approach to immigration.

I agree with them on one thing. The economy is currently very important and Parliament does need to discuss the job losses, factory closures, banking weakness and the large government borrowing. The Queen’s Speech debate going on for a week allows us to do just that for once. It is a luxury we can enjoy, as I did last Wednesday. Who knows when next we will be allowed to debate the state of the economy in between all the breaks and holidays?


  1. rugfish
    December 9, 2008

    I propose that the Tory leadership speaks to Adam Boulton or to Jeremy Paxman, and states that it wants to have a televised debate with a studio audience, on the economy. Such a debate could span 3 or 4 hours and be beamed live into people’s homes.

    The government should be invited to speak to the people on its actions todate and on its plans for the future of Britain’s economy but if it isn’t willing then alternative speakers and economists could be found.

    The people could be let in on this debate if it had a studio audience and emails to the debate.

    It could be the mother of all debates on Britain’s economic future and permit both sides to fairly get their message across to the British public in contrast to the snippets they get now from media spokespersons such as I need not mention in case I get modded again.

    1. jean baker
      December 9, 2008


      ” … in case I get modded again” …. do you mean by John or government IT patrollers ? John is an advocate of free speech and opinion, not a biased, prejudiced ‘moderator’.

      1. rugfish
        December 9, 2008

        No I meant JR.
        I got carried away earlier when suggesting some accident should befall a certain European visitor so I’m glad Mr Redwood intervened to protect me from any Labour Party agents which may be lurking near by.

  2. Letters From A Tory
    December 9, 2008

    Harriet Harman and the Labour government have been using their powers to limit all the important debates in Parliament and I’m sick and tired of it.

    We are supposed to live in a democracy. The government should never have the power to set the rules of the debate or the amount of time for a debate to suit them.

    1. jean baker
      December 9, 2008

      Harriet Harman and the government have been ‘abusing’ their duty to serve on democratic principles.

  3. jean baker
    December 9, 2008


    Is the Speaker failing in his duties of ensuring matters of concern to Opposition MP’s are afforded the time required for full and open ‘democratic debates’ ?

    I cannot imagine Betty Boothroyde would have stood for labour’s attitude. Is the ‘Speaker’ democractically elected ? I ask because the current Speaker appears to be a spineless ‘yes man’ to labour’s ‘fancies’.

    Reply: The government decides the business. Sensible governments consult and listen to what the Opposition suggests. This government doesn’t, and has the votes to do as it wishes.

  4. mikestallard
    December 9, 2008

    One Party Socialists demand their way, because they are RIGHT! Nobody is interested in what the Reactionaries say. So of course you are not given a chance to speak in Parliament!

    Even so, I hugely enjoyed David Cameron’s excellent speech this morning to, of all places, the leftie LSE.
    He made all the right noises and even gave three reasons to cut back the state! He then went to say exactly how he intended to do it.
    At the end, I was only able to listen to two of the usual questions which he fielded efficiently and tersely.
    I hope that he continues this sort of thing. He is really talented at it, and he has got a workable plan which will achieve the historic Conservative task of putting back what Labour has taken out of the life of our country.

  5. Acorn
    December 9, 2008

    Er, is this the point where I mention separating the “executive” from the “legislature” again?

    Monday (8th Dec), was another classic example of a de-facto elected dictatorship; and, the utter futility of the Commons. If any citizen wanted a reason not to bother visiting a ballot box, Monday in the Commons will be your best excuse.

    Please, just read this link. Particularly, 4.1 TERM. JR complains about our parliament having frequent holidays, read how the US constitution stops congress from adjourning for more than three days. Notice that Congress has an election every two years. When the voters have an opportunity to show their approval, or disapproval, of their government at this frequency, politicians tend to take more notice of them.


Comments are closed.