The quality of MPs letters on both sides of the assisted dying debate just shows how much more value backbenchers could add if they were given a proper role in our parliamentary system.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
I'm - personally - right in the middle of this. As a patient with a very rare cancer, recently an end-of-life help and care for a friend (and their partner) and, because a family member is in Canada has signed up to MAiD. Perhaps I should put my thoughts together on a page
The system drives me nuts. It’s like MPs come all keen and are given jobs unrelated to their experience, asked to vote on legislation barely comprehensible to an expert and then to suspend personal judgement and moral compass and to do what they’re told if they ever want to be promoted
I'm not suggesting you could get rid of whipping but you could give backbenchers more opportunity to trigger meaningful debates including via select committees. This is what real scrutiny looks like and we could do with more of it.
Sort of agree. I think the media's obsession with MPs who 'defy' the whip means that leaders now have to be seen to take action, (Don't know if historically this has always been the case.).
Select committees should be properly funded, there should be specialist researchers on each one. I’ve been a witness at a committee at the questions were so off beam it was bewildering. A graduate researcher assigned to the committee would up the ante to a huge degree.
Remember watching 1 - must have been re mobile phone hacking etc. The Murdochs were there, even James was having to smother smiles at an idiot banging a desk yelling "who wrote/signed the cheques" displaying total lack of knowledge as to how corporations work... I was embarrassed, for the committee
And the evolution of MPs over the last 60 years from legislators to glorified social workers who spend half their time dealing with the failings of atrophied local councils must, to some degree, be a contributor to the deterioration in the effectiveness of our governing institutions
Currently the way Parliament works, with 3 line whips for almost all votes, it renders the process of democracy mute, as our representatives cannot really use their own voice. 1 of 2
If all legislation allowed MPs to listen to debates, assess the arguments and vote accordingly with their informed opinion, then democracy might not have the massive deficit that encumbers it's current failing form. 2 of 2
Historically, MPs did debate. One of the damaging things that happened in the last 10 years was dodgy PMs taking considered opinion as personal affront.
Remember the significant exit when Johnson booted MPs out for disagreeing.
And of course we have Faragist meaningless fact-free point-scoring.
I’ve been so disappointed by the debate. Emphasis on palliative care. Risk of coercion. My mother this, my best friend that. But if someone is in unbearable pain … what then? Surely there’s only one humane response? That’s the point.
I wrote “humane response”. You answered with “human response”. Palliative care, at its best, is brilliant. But when it’s not enough, it should include helping people to slip away from unbearable pain and from life. Humanely.
Comments
It was defeated
Be even better if parties were banned from punishing MPs for voting in the interests of constituents and their children.
Despite all the cynicism, on the whole were blessed with some decent & thoughtful Parliamentarians (with a few notable exceptions)
So everyone has skin in the game
I think being a free vote helps
As does being "a matter of conscience"
I also suspect the large number of new younger MPs has been a positive
They just seem more open, willing & able to speak & use modern communication
Also I would argue that the problem is, when boiled down, most votes are a matter of conscience
Traditionally they tend to outrank conscience
My representative is Sir Christopher "upskirting" Chope
Whereas my mates across the river stour have Tom Hayes up in Westminster
Remember the significant exit when Johnson booted MPs out for disagreeing.
And of course we have Faragist meaningless fact-free point-scoring.