Sharpe's Opinion

Thursday, 28th May, 2009

Lord Norton, on why independent MPs don’t always fare that well in Parliament:

The dilemma is the same now as it was when Vernon Bartlett was elected as an Independent MP in 1938. He recalled in his memoirs: ‘I had warned the electors of Bridgwater that I should vote only on matters that I understood: I was not going to be bossed about by party whips. That had sounded all right in the constituency, at a time when there was a strong reaction against exaggerated party discipline… But I found that I understood so little, and I had no party whip to explain procedure to me.’

I have to admit, I’d actually prefer a situation where MPs only voted on legislation they understood (or, indeed, ‘crowd-sourced’ their decision making process for issues they don’t fully understand) rather than blindly doing what the whip tells them. If MPs understood more of what they passed, Parliament might make better decisions.

Comments

Didn’t you mean If ‘the People’ understood more of what ‘went on in Parliament,’ Parliament might make better decisions?

I get the impression (because I do not know quite how it works, only the insiders know this) that the select committees, consisting of the chosen few, do the scrutinising and make the significant decisions. There is not much for other MPs to do as parliamentary time is limited. The whips/Speaker like to limit the difficult questions being asked by backbenchers and obviously prefer every MP to fall into line.

However, the role of the media is critical in a democracy, as is currently being demonstrated. It would appear that the media influencing public opinion influences Parliament more than the current influence of MPs’ appreciation of the issues!