The case for the wholesale reform of Parliament and our political system is overwhelming. The belated attempts by New Labour to introduce reform have been too little too late and seem deeply patronising to an electorate tired of spin and bullshit. The Tories are no better. They love the undemocratic ‘first past the post system’ and most of what they have said about reform is bullshit too. To be fair to the LibDems, they have been banging on about electoral reform for years. How far they support the wide-ranging changes necessary to bring about an effective new democracy is still open to question.
‘The Times’ made reform one of the planks of the election in their leader article on Tuesday.
“Voters have lost trust in their elected representatives. This is perhaps the strongest motivation behind the desire for an election and the mood for change.
Removing MPs who have transgressed will help. So will changing many of the rules governing conduct (can it really be within the rules for an MP to be a paid lobbyist for a private company?). But by themselves they will not do the job.
The British Parliament has too many MPs of indifferent quality, too many laws poorly drafted and scrutinised, too many party whips and too little independence. A bold political leader would reshape Parliament. There should be open primaries for selection contests, the ability to recall MPs, fewer but better-paid representatives and a modern Parliament that is controlled by its members and is better understood by the voters.” Times 06/04/2010
A modern Parliament would also do away with arcane and asinine rules, which act as a barrier to involvement. The installation of electronic voting would, at a stroke, get rid of the awful lobby method of voting, diminish the power of the whips, reduce bullying and be massively more efficient and effective.
“Change means not only procedural reforms. It means changing politics itself.”(ibid)
Quite.
No comments:
Post a Comment