|
Post by Neko Bazu on Jun 11, 2009 17:32:52 GMT -1
Oh, I don't expect Brown to do anything other than weasel on in his highly-paid seat for as long as possible. I know what I'd consider to be the right thing, though Would you consider it to be quite such the right thing to do if he was likely to win rather than lose? I consider it the right thing to do in that it'll get shot of the more corrupt members of parliament who the public can't hold any trust in now. Whether or not Brown would win is irrelevant to that; I used the term 'weasel on' because if he called an election right now, Labour would almost certainly lose, and obviously, he doesn't want that. He's going to do what's best for him and his party, not for the country - which isn't exactly what we elect MPs for.
|
|
|
Post by derbiean on Jun 11, 2009 18:06:31 GMT -1
Oh i dunno i'd rather have Brown as PM instead of Cameron
|
|
|
Post by ancientblade on Jun 11, 2009 18:15:18 GMT -1
Would you consider it to be quite such the right thing to do if he was likely to win rather than lose? I consider it the right thing to do in that it'll get shot of the more corrupt members of parliament who the public can't hold any trust in now. Whether or not Brown would win is irrelevant to that; I used the term 'weasel on' because if he called an election right now, Labour would almost certainly lose, and obviously, he doesn't want that. He's going to do what's best for him and his party, not for the country - which isn't exactly what we elect MPs for. There are quite a lot of decent MPs who don't actually abuse the expenses system, and some of those MPs are Labour MPs. My own MP is a Labour MP and was held up by the Telegraph as one of the best value MPs in the country. He has no second home, usually travels to London from his constituency by standard class rail travel, and if an overnight stay is necessary he uses travel lodges, premier Inns or hotels of that type. Unfortunately he is defending a majority of only 300 or so. He will undoubtedly lose his seat. So an election will not only get rid of corrupt MPs. Is David Cameron lilly white in all of this? Is he less corrupt than Brown? My view is that he isn't, but he will be the next prime minister. So will trust be rebuilt by his election? My view is that it is the duty of this parliament to sort out the expenses fiasco, not pass it on to anyone else. It won't make any difference to the outcome of the election when it eventually comes. Labour will lose. I feel it is impossible for them to turn it around from here, just as it was for John Major's government.
|
|
|
Post by Neko Bazu on Jun 11, 2009 19:25:46 GMT -1
I know well that there are decent MPs, and that some are Labour; Kelvin Hopkins of Luton North is IMO the best MP currently standing, in that he actually represents the people and doesn't have his nose in the trough. It's just a shame that I'm in Luton South and thus "represented" by Maggie Moron.
There'll be decent MPs lost in every election; that's how it goes. I personally believe that the integrity of parliament as a whole is more important than the success of one or two MPs, though, and as such I think it's time to clear out the dead wood now. If anyone in any other organisation were found to have abused expenses on such a scale, they'd have been sacked for gross misconduct - and with immediate effect, not as of the end of their contract. Why should our MPs be any different?
|
|
|
Post by ancientblade on Jun 15, 2009 15:40:30 GMT -1
You say you want an election in order to get shot of the more corrupt members of parliament. I don't think there is any certainty that an election would achieve that. There are far worse forms of corruption about than fiddling or over playing your expenses
If an election were to be held now I think the only certainty is that we will have a Conservative government led by David Cameron as opposed to a Labour government led by Gordon Brown.
Is Cameron more 'honest' than Brown. Only a personal opinion I know, but I certainly don't trust him. And on the expenses front Brown claims much less than Cameron does, even though his constituency is miles further away.
In terms running the country it is qutie possible to argue Brown has been less than satisfactory. But in terms of his personal integrity, I would prefer Brown to Cameron.
I feel that most of the people arguing for a general election now are using the expenses scandal as an excuse. Most are simply Conservative party sympathisers who really only want an election now because theyknow they are highly likely to win. If the Conservatives were 15 points or so adrift in the opinion polls there would not be the slightest appetite for an election from them.
|
|