skip to main |
skip to sidebar
I am indebted to an email correspondent, Stuart, who directs me to an article by Patrick Hennessy, Political Editor of the Daily and Sunday Telegraph, which advises that members of the public will have the right to sit in judgment on misbehaving MPs for the first time under key parliamentary reforms to be announced. We are advised that the existing Standards and Privileges Committee is to be split into two separate bodies with members of the public able to apply for positions on the new Standards Committee, which will rule on disciplinary cases - although those members of the public admitted to membership of this new committee will not have voting rights.
I hope readers will forgive the repitition, but it is necessary to refer once again on this subject to the Coalition's "Our Programme for Government" in which it is stated (page 27)
"We will bring forward early legislation to introduce a power of recall, allowing voters to force a by-election where an MP is found to have engaged in serious wrongdoing and having had a petition calling for a by-election signed by 10% of his or her constituents."
only to discover, when the Bill was presented to Parliament, that the final decision will rest with a committee of an errant peer's 'elders'. In other words the original proposal was a sop to democracy, one intended to give the impression that power was being devolved when in fact power had not been devolved as the final decision remained with the political elite.
So it is with this latest idea. We will have to wait for the details, but it will be interesting to see whether these 'lay' members of the public will be in addition to the present number that sit on committees, or whether they will be included in that number - in any event they will be outnumbered by the MPs on the committee. When one reads that 'lay' members of the public will be involved, the impression is given that those 'lay' members will comprise the likes of you and me, 'ordinary' people, yet when one looks at the 'lay' members on the General Medical Council or the Solicitors Regulation Authority those 'lay' members are most definitely not 'ordinary' people. What will be the selection process and who will make the decision on those to be elevated to this new standards committee?
As with the recall of MPs, this latest idea to make Parliament more transparent and accountable to the public does anything but that - it retains all power in the hands of the few. Reading the comments (61 at the time of writing) there is not one in favour of this proposed idea - and in fact all are not only dismissive but include one request not to be a member of the committee, but a member of the firing squad.
If the existing Standards & Privileges Committee is to be split into two, then by the same reasoning should not the Privileges Committee also have 'lay' members? In fact, again as one commenter writes, should not both committees be comprised of 'lay' members?
This proposal is but another example of how our democratic system is broken, misused by the political elite for personal gain, whilst having reached the point whereby to apply the word democracy to it is not just a misnomer, it is deceitful. It is noticed that those two stalwarts of 'direct democracy', Hannan and Carswell, so far are absent from this debate - probably because 'their plan' continues the idea of central power and control.
We learn today that Kate Green, Labour MP for Stretford and Urmston since May 2010, has used the House of Commons to complain about a guest beer that is available in The Stranger's Bar - despite her reportedly never having set foot there. The actual exchange between Kate Green and Sir George Young is recorded as:
"Kate Green (Stretford and Urmston) (Lab): Will the Leader of the House arrange a debate on dignity at work in Parliament? Last night I was disturbed to learn that the guest beer in the Strangers Bar is called Top Totty, and that there is a picture of a nearly naked woman on the tap. As well as arranging a debate, will the Leader of the House join me in asking for that beer to be withdrawn from the bar immediately?
Sir George Young: I was not aware of that particular picture in the bar. I will raise the matter with the appropriate Officer of the House through the House of Commons Commission, and I am sure that appropriate action will be taken. I should very much regret it if any offensive pictures were on display in any part of the House."
Beside querying the manner in which the question was raised (publicly), would not a quiet word with the Leader of the House not have been more acceptable? One can only assume that Kate Green exhibits that trait of all politicians, namely that of 'attention-seeking'. Perhaps her next public utterance will be to call for the famous scantily-clad Flying Lady on Virgin planes to be removed - or does one have to be a virgin to so complain? The reply from Sir George Young also begs one or two questions; namely, are we to infer that he has never, ever been in The Stranger's Bar - and if that is incorrect, has he had his eyesight tested lately? That his first response is to regret if any offensive pictures were on display speaks volumes.
Kate Green is not alone though in exhibiting juvenile behaviour when one considers the spectacle of Prime Minister's questions yesterday. Both Conservative and Labour backbenchers indulged in chanting the responses to their leader's rhetorical questions and in so doing indulged in antics that one would expect from children in primary school - although acknowledging the poor standard of our education system, perhaps primary school should be amended to read secondary modern.
Depending on who you believe - Keith Vaz or Jack Straw - MPs are either so busy they have little time for important matters of state, or they are bored out of their tiny little minds. Where Kate Green is concerned we must therefore assume it is a case of the latter and that she does, indeed, have a tiny little mind.
It is regrettable that such behaviour is presented for public consumption by those to whom we mere mortals are supposed to 'look-up-to' and revere. And MPs wonder why the public is 'switched-off' by politics?
