What if voters really mattered?

The government managed to railroad the Lisbon Treaty through the House of Commons last night. Why? Because legions of low-grade MPs preferred to toady to their Whips, rather than vote the way their constituents wanted.

Watching the hoard of parasitical politicians flocking through the government lobby, it struck me; with the exception of a few Lib Dems in marginal seats, most of these MPs are able to treat the electorate with contempt only because they are voted in from "one party fiefdom" constituencies - the so-called "safe seats".

Imagine if the voters had a right of recall, open primaries to re-adopt all sitting MPs, a right of initiative and no taxpayer-funded political parties? Westminster politicians might start to actually take seriously the people they are supposed to serve. It’s not only policy towards the EU that would change …

Comments

[Alex Swanson]

open primaries to re-adopt all sitting MPs

No! The nomination of candidates is entirely a matter for candidates themselves to organise (through political parties if they so wish, but not if they don't). There is no reason why any candidate, sitting MP or otherwise, should be forced to involve anyone they don't want to.

Now, if you were to suggest that Conservative Party internal rules should require compulsory re-selection, I could go along with that. But even then, only members should have a say.

[NigelC]

The same could be said for district and county councillors who are also subject to whipping.
A few do a valauble job at ward level but many duck the hard issues and treat the electorate with contempt

[bexie]

The constitution should demand that any change to the authority of Parliament should go back to the people of the country, after all we are the people who have devolved it there in the first place.

Mind you I would put the budget to referendum every year too.

[Dave B]

"open primaries to re-adopt all sitting MPs"

I'd love to see this, but to the best of my knowledge only some Conservative associations use any form of primary/caucus in their selection process. Will Mr Clarke's democracy task force be recommending legislation? Hope so.

[Martin Coxall]

Alternative Vote or some Condorcet criterion for the Commons.

Make all candidates need to get the support of at least 50% of their electorate to be returned. Bang goes 90% of safe seats over night.

[Tory Tax Cutter]

Presumably douglas includes his Conservative colleague Ken Clarke in this rant?

[TFA Tory]

After his treachery last night, Ken Clarke's chairmanship of Dave's Democracy Taskforce looks like a sick joke. Those who supported his leadership bids should be ashamed of themselves.

[Deborah]

There should be no automatic re-selection in a party that claims to believe in competition and a meritocracy.

[Margaret on the Guillotine]

Douglas Carswell - on sycophantic MPs doing the Whips' bidding: you last night, er, voted with your Whip. Do you take the time to judge how many Tory voters in Harwich say yes or no to every question that comes up in the Commons? Or do you you use your judgement as MPs should in a representative democracy? Have you ever read Burke?

On recall elections: 58% of the voters in Harwich in 2005 opposed you. All the other parties in Tendring hate the Tories so much there is a coalition comprising all the rag-tag independents just to keep the Tories out. Do you think you'd be safe from recall? Should you be deposed in this manner?

Martin Coxall - "bang go 90% of safe seats" - yes, mainly Tory safe seats, as the necessary Liberal-Labour transfers to keep the Tories out. Do you not see that you are still out-of-touch extremists even after 11 years out, and what Ed Davey said in the House last night about Cameron being under the thumb of the extremists is true?

As for the wider point of compulsory re-selection: this was a canard used by the Bennites in Labour in the '80s, meaning "kick out anyone who isn't one of us, because we have the stronger base in the internal party machines", and it's a canard now meaning exactly the same. The difference being you have taken over the Tory Party whereas Benn failed.

The message is stuff those who vote for the Party but who aren't members; stuff those who might vote for your Party if it moved to the centre ground, and who you need to convince to win a majority; stuff the whole nation who you would govern if you could win an election. Let's stick on pleasing ourselves, and bring on more Hagues and Duncan-Smiths.

Harsh (also a bit rambling) but true.

[Dave B]

@Margaret on the Guillotine

The point of 'Open Primaries' for re-selection of sitting MPs, as suggested by Mr Carswell and Direct Democracy, is that they are open to all electors, not just party members.

[Charles Tannock MEP]

I remain sceptical about the merits of open primaries in the UK. For a start they disenfrancise the paid-up ordinary party membership who are expected to afterwards do all the work to get the selected candidate elected, so therefore I believe party members should have a privileged role in selecting the candidates. Secondly (although it has not yet happened unless you include over representation in those voting by family members and friends) the system is open to abuse by busing in and manipulation whereby the local Lib/Lab opposition could come in and vote for the weakest shortlisted Tory candidate. So far the open primary system has resulted in business as usual and therefopre worked smoothly ie the bulk who bother to take part are party members but this could all change if open primaries becomes the norm in our party. I know open primaries are very popular with our party but be warned they mught end in tears!