MPs' cash for questions/access - how much?

[Aggers]

Whatever they were paid, there would always be some MPs who would seek to supplement their income.

How true !!!

But of course, parliament would never pass a law banning the practice. That is the
main fault with democracy. There needs to be an over-ruling body or person who is
empowered to do so. It would suit me if Royalty had that job, but I'm probably alone
in that view.

The other day I was with a group of gentlemen discussing the present state and the
future prospects for this country, and in an unguarded, hot-headed moment, I said
that we might have been better off had we lost the 2nd World War. To my surprise
no eyebrows were raised and the only comment was, "A lot of people say that".
That is food for thought, isn't it?

The truth is that democracy is being destroyed by the very people we elect to look
after our interests.

[Suff]

But of course, parliament would never pass a law banning the practice. That is the
main fault with democracy. There needs to be an over-ruling body or person who is
empowered to do so. It would suit me if Royalty had that job, but I'm probably alone
in that view.

Well we had that. The Monarch had that power. Then the unelected Lords with peerages allocated by the Monarch had that power.

These powers have been taken away in the name of democracy. Checks and balances put into the hands of people who's sole goal is return to "power".

Every time I hear about an elected Lords or more elected Lords, this exact thought goes through my mind. They want to get rid of the old fossils who owe no allegiance to anybody because they can't influence them for gain.

The truth is that democracy is being destroyed by the very people we elect to look
after our interests.

That's because we refuse to look after our own interests. We assume that once we cast a vote, often the way parents cast the vote, without learning how the system works or even wanting to know how the system works; then those who are elected will "look after our interests". Nobody will look after our interests if we do not look after them ourselves.

A vote cannot be just on party lines. A vote must speak for what we feel and what we want. Even if that vote is for the monster raving loony party.

Votes which are not cast, votes which are spoiled and votes which are cast without thought to what they will bring, cause exactly this.

People who will look after our interests For Themselves!

[Workingman]

A vote cannot be just on party lines. A vote must speak for what we feel and what we want. Even if that vote is for the monster raving loony party.

Problems for democracy come in many forms. Nobody can force people to engage, and when they do, nobody can force them to behave in a certain way - that's democracy.

The Australian system of fining people for not voting does not prevent them voting on party lines or spoiling their ballots. The UK system of forcing, under pain of a fine, to register does not make them vote or prevent them voting on party lines or spoiling their ballots.

In many ways it is preferable that only those who are genuinely interested go to vote. That might mean only a small percentage actually get off their backsides and vote, but it is up to the politicians to behave in a way that persuades more people to engage, and that is another problem.

Perhaps a spell under a beneficent, but tough, dictator is needed to clean out the cesspit.

[Suff]

Personally I think that losing rights for a decade is what it would take. The problem is that it would have to be someone who did things that the majority did not want.

That is more destruction than I personally want to see.

[Aggers]

Perhaps a spell under a beneficent, but tough, dictator is needed to clean out the cesspit.

Now you're talking.

That exactly what I think.

I'll volunteer if you like.