I’m really pleased to have received another guest post from Sonny. Of course part of the reason I’m pleased is that it saves me from writing posts – I can keep the debate going on here and still concentrate on the day-job. However, the main reason I’m pleased is that it raises another really interesting topic.
Over to Sonny.
- – -
Think about independent MP and how this might impact the day to day running of government, it’s hard not to conclude that party politics in the current system will always win out. For the simple reason that even if 95% of MPs were independent and the other 5% was one party… the combined organisation and collaboration means that the party would rule.
So you can see how and why party politics have come to govern our country over the years. A group of like minded people coming together to unify resources. But this could mean something like 37% of the votes rules 100% of the population because they get to choose the cabinet from their group of like minded people. It’s frowned upon to do otherwise.
When Boris Johnson was campaigning for The Mayor of London he asked Menzies Campbell to work underneath him if he won. Campbell considered it but from what I can see to be peer pressure only, he turned it down. It would be “letting the side down” or “sleeping with the enemy” as it was construed. I thought this was a preposterous way to look at it. Johnson was simply asking the person he considered to be best for the job regardless of colour (party colour I mean) and the Lib Dems looked a gift horses in the mouth. They turned down the opportunity to be a seriously active part of a governing body, not just someone shouting from the side lines.
It was a sad day for politics and democracy in my opinion, but it shows how our government might be forced into picking a cabinet in the manner of “best of a bad bunch” rather than “best man for the job” (or woman obviously). I would have thought that a conservative would have been better suited to running the fiscal elements of government, where as a socialist better at social welfare issues, a green party member better at energy management, a BNP member on immigration (only joking, the only role they have in the cabinet is locked away in the bottom draw behind the bed linen… just my opinion though). Essentially though, our current system of choosing a government means that we are not utilising some of our countries finest talents, just because of their party affiliation.
In order to make sure Independent MPs is a viable option of government and not one that is sacked off after the first term in office I think we need to get rid of party politics altogether. So Fred Smith stands as Fred Smith for Northampton, not Fred Smith, Labour. You choose the person that best represents you as a constituent not who you think is more likely to stop the other party that you don’t like getting in. Tactical voting would no longer be an issue.
Instead we have a House comprising completely independent MPs, who get together to choose a Prime Minister and a Cabinet so that all MPs have as much of a say, rather than the situation we’ve had with Gordon Brown becoming an unelected PM. With the whole House choosing the Cabinet/PM who are in turn accountable to the whole house, this would encourage people to stand up for what they actually believe in and what their constituents believe in. Not the current system where some MPs suck up to those with a bit more power, just to get a nice seat in the cabinet and then when it all goes wrong they just all swap places and do just as bad a job. How many positions in Cabinet has Mr Mandelson held even after he has been involved in scandals…. (hushed tones from a lawyer)… allegedly.
This is surely a better form of democracy than party politics and first past the post?
- – -
Very interesting.
So, what do you think? Should we scrap party politics altogether?
expenses scandal (especially Alan Duncan and Keith Vaz). As he was interviewed by Victoria, he made some really interesting comments about what it takes to be an independent MP:
So, last night’s Question Time on the BBC featured Nick Griffin, the leader of the BNP. I’m sure you knew that anyway, there was a huge amount of controversy over whether he should be allowed to appear.
I don’t know if you’ve heard … but the speed limits in the UK are about to change. The new limit on the motorway is being reduce to 65 mile per hour and anyone who has ever travelled at 70 mph in the past is going to get a retrospective ticket. They will be sent out in the post and it’s expected that nearly everyone will be asked to pay a fine.
People that know me will already be aware that I’m a massive fan of The West Wing – the US TV series with Martin Sheen playing President Josiah Bartlett. Well I’m now onto the final series of the box set I treated myself to at Christmas (I’m really proud of myself that I’ve managed to spread it out this long – there was a danger I’d watch them all within about 2 weeks).
The Jury Team fails to ‘Make me an MP’
Tags: BBC, By-election, Glasgow North-East, Independent MPs, John Smeaton, The Jury Team
I watched last night’s programme on BBC1 called ‘Make me an MP’ – it followed John Smeaton’s attempt to win the recent Glasgow North-East by-election. (You can see it on iPlayer here until 25th November).
And if you don’t know, John Smeaton was the baggage handler who ‘chinned’ one of the Glasgow airport terrorists.
Overall, John Smeaton came across as a nice, engaging guy who genuinely had an interest in his local area – there was one nice bit where he was passionately concerned about the amount of dog mess on the streets.
However, he didn’t seem to understand the level of work that was involved – firstly to kiss all the babies and shake all the hands on the campaign trail, but also once in parliament. The expectation from the voters is that you’re working all the time for them, that you never stop trying to help improve their lot – and possibly even more so if you’re an independent – and that the effort put into the campaign is possibly a good indication for voters of the effort you will put into the job you do in Parliament.
The main feeling though, was that he was let down by The Jury Team.
The programme itself was a publicity coup for The Jury Team, but in the end it was bad PR as they came across quite badly.
One element was particularly painful to watch and that was the initial press release. John Smeaton was crucified by the media attending it and it seemed that it was his ‘support’ from The Jury Team that was picked up most.
Now, he had obviously been very badly briefed by whoever was working with him and not only had he not been given details about what policies were held, but he wasn’t even given the most basic media training on how to deflect difficult questions.
At that press conference the scepticism of the media was frightening – was it for The Jury Team, was it for the candidate, or was it (most frightening of all) because he was an independent?
While the Bonfire Night stunt was clearly a stupid, stupid idea from the very moment it was mentioned. The candidate himself was “livid” and it was at this point he felt he was being let down by The Jury Team. John’s dad said it best when he said, “The Jury Team should not treat Parliament with contempt.”
In the end John beat other fringe candidates (including an ex-Big Brother contestant), but still came a distant 8th with just 258 votes (Labour won with 12,231).
In the final analysis it felt like John Smeaton had been let down by The Jury Team. While they offered some financial backing that allowed him to stand (as he may not have been able to without it), they also wanted to hijack the campaign.
The Jury Team talks about wanting to support independent MPs, but it doesn’t, it wants people who are not affiliated to a mainstream party – which is very different. The Jury Team, or possible Sir Paul Judge, seems to want to use ‘independent’ candidates to promote its own agenda, i.e. become a political party through the back door.
This is a long, long way from supporting true independents.
The show did finish with a nice quote. As John Smeaton looked back on his failed campaign he was pleased to have tried:
“The most honourable thing to do in politics is to stand as an independent.”