baldysblog.co.uk

Today saw the launch of an interesting idea, an umbrella organisation for finding and supporting independent MPs during election campaigns and using the web and text voting to allow the public to select particular candidates for their constituency, I’m not quite clear how the latter will work in the UK…

The people behind this led by businessman Sir Paul Judge, a former director general of Conservative Central Office, who believe that the internet will fundamentally begin to change politics and that the party system has “turned the government and the political system into the domain of a very small number of people where arrogance has developed… Their web site is : – http://www.juryteam.org/ I wish them well in a brave venture.

My View

I welcome this initiative simply because the basic principle is correct, more independent MPs are the answer to what in effect has become an “Elected Dictatorship” of up to a 5 year duration.

However and although it may seem a quibble, it is less the “party system” which is at fault here and more the type of person who seeks a career in politics and therefore becomes a slave to party direction in order to further their career. In other words, being a Member of Parliament has lost all reference to Vocation, Principles and the Public Good and instead become “Just a Job” where sucking a fart out of the Boss’s arse is part of career progression we all seem to live in “Rotten Boroughs”.

The Real Problem

However and as I have written before (http://baldysblog.co.uk/2009/01/14/600-david-still-far-too-many/), electing “Independent MPs” is a practical immediate solution but the real problem is the Constitutional one which needs changing but, not in a hurry, changes should be carefully considered and debated.

We in the UK suffer from the lack of a clear “Separation of Powers” between the “Executive” in the shape of the Prime Minister/Cabinet and the “Legislature” – all sitting MPs who have the power to vote for or vote against the funding for any “Bill” which of course, is why they are called “Bills”.

The medium to long term need is to “grow a solution” to this issue that allows the Executive reasonable room for immediate action as required but to remove the “total power” the PM currently enjoys. It is a scary thought but the British Prime Minister has more freedom of action than the President of the United States even if fewer physical resources.

Back to the Jury Team

The “Jury Team” sets out what it calls its “governance proposals” for candidates to sign up to in order to get their support and I believe the following are the key points:

• MPs’ pay scales being in line with those of civil servants.
• That there is a £50,000 cap on individual donations to political parties.
• MPs should serve no more than three terms of five years.
• General elections should take place regularly every five years.
• Setting up an independent Politicians Complaints Commission for the public to contact.

Now whilst in principle these seem fair, only 2 out of the 5 make any sense to me, the cap on donations and setting up a Complaints body, the latter likely to prove expensive to run and satisfying no one. The limit on terms served has some merit but will require an awful lot more work, it may produce more problems than it solves, as stated it most certainly is not a “solution” to anything. For the other two, I need to disagree strongly.

Not the Right Approach

MPs Pay:

It is not possible for MPs pay to mirror the Civil Service pay grades, the latter are employees and ‘static’ in terms of location with all travel costs provided as required only, the former may often genuinely, need to support two homes and travel between them.

I actually think that there should be a total overhaul of the way MPs operate within their own constituency anyway but that I will address in detail at another time.

On the subject of MP’s remuneration, the real scandal lies in the “salary, expenses, John Lewis List and Pensions – in other words their total cost and who they employ to help them. Putting in a “salary cap or equivalent” does nothing to help solve the problem of public confidence in their probity.

The immediate solution is fairly simple, make them all self employed and if between everything it works out that an MP costs us £225,000 each, then that is what they get paid gross, they can then explain to the Inland Revenue through their accounts, just how the money was spent. When it comes to employing your wife, the Revenue have quite specific rules and will be far more effective than any Parliamentary Committee.

Fixed 5 Year Terms:

The answer is NO or at least, not as things currently stand. To consider the negatives of doing this in the UK, you need to understand that we just don’t have the Constitutional Structure to support it in any shape or form and I am surprised that the Jury Team included it as part of their ‘pledge’ – silly.

In the US there are fixed 4 year Presidential terms but also, mid term elections too,  plus there is a very strong separation of powers between the President (Executive) and “The Hill” (Legislature).

What we are living through today and with a whole year yet to go, is the nonsense of a full 5 year term because Brown isn’t going early and the spineless turkeys on his backbenches, aren’t voting for an early Christmas either. In other words what we see today is what “Fixed 5 Year Terms” would bring us under such a proposal. Do we want it ? Nooooooo !

5 Responses to “Independent Members of Parliament”