Lobby fodder

0
Have your say

I Norval’s letter (Letters, 27 September) suggesting that MPs’ pay come more directly from the voters, via municipal channels, though unlikely to be accepted by the political parties would remind them of whom they are paid to represent, ie, us voters, rather than their party executives.

The recent Westminster vote to send our forces to war in 
Iraq yet again illustrates the remoteness of “lobby fodder” 
MPs from the views of the public who, I surmise, are very 
sceptical.

The Prime Minister’s claims of direct threats to us in the UK seem less likely to have come from Eastern terrorists than from the US State and Defence Departments!

The 46 MPs who voted against this further Middle East invasion, with John Redwood abstaining, would probably have been joined by very many more but for pressures exerted by party whips and threats to their careers. That’s not true democracy; claims of damage to carrying out parliamentary business are surely less important than such impairments of democratic principles prompted by party executives, which are far too powerful.

We have seen much bad parliamentary legislation in recent years, with poor outcomes, eg, from aggressive military activities, from European Union meddling and from nonsense deriving from futile attempts 
to influence global climate changes.

Surely it’s time to review the way parliamentary business is enacted, so as to make the will of the people better recognised and acted upon.

The Westminster and the Holyrood “bubbles” need to be abolished.

(Dr) Charles Wardrop

Viewlands Rd West

Perth

Back to the top of the page