Is It Time To Introduce A Qualifying Standard For M Ps?

[ToraToraTora]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68773702

It's a reasonably important job with reasonable salary. In any other area they'd need proper qualifications and have probably have to pass some sort of aptitude test. MPs have no such rigours so we get brainless wallies like this who can't keep it in their pants and are thus easy prey to net scammers and assorted exploiters.

[naomi24]

Neither education nor background guarantees common sense or moral propriety.

[ToraToraTora]

No guarantee of course but you can weed out a lot of the dross. Eg in IT they give you and aptitude test early on to indicate if you do at least have the required abilities. That's not 100% but it's pretty close.

[naomi24]

It demonstrates that you have the required ability to carry out particular physical tasks but it gives no indication of your work ethic or your moral code.

[THECORBYLOON]

Does any country's democratic assembly require, "proper qualifications" or an aptitude test prior to folk becoming members?

What do you mean by, "proper qualifications"?

If such tests were introduced, should they apply to sitting MPs?

[Untitled]

there already is a qualifying standard... they need to be successfully elected.

unfortunately our ridiculous first-past-the-post electoral system guarantees huge numbers of safe seats which are dumping grounds for low-quality candidates or people whom the party leaders want unconditionally... our system also means it is unnecessary and in fact uncommon to win the majority of votes in a given place in order to get elected which further assists low-quality candidates.

so... the real problem is that our electoral system is rubbish and also frankly that british voters have rubbish taste and need to have higher standards! the latter is difficult to achieve however because in most cases the electoral system punishes those who do not vote for the main two parties (this is called the "spoiler effect").

a better electoral system will never of course eliminate corruption or bad behaviour but it will mean that people are elected based on their ideas rather than the colour of their rosette. it would also broaden considerably the kind of people who actually participate in our politics which is absolutely dominated by well-off middle class people who are career politicians and have done very little else... that has to end.

[ToraToraTora]

Valid points untitled but there is no better system. All the others are PR and that has been showed to be far worse, essentially paralysys.

[Untitled]

PR does not guarantee paralysis and FPTP does not guarantee stability. both outcomes are possible under each system.

Lee Anderson was elected to represent Ashfield on less than 40% of votes cast... absolutely ridiculous system. if you are going to have constituency-based MPs (and not all systems require it) then at least oblige them to win the majority of votes cast!!

 

[andy-hughes]

Untitled - // ... a better electoral system will never of course eliminate corruption or bad behaviour but it will mean that people are elected based on their ideas rather than the colour of their rosette. it would also broaden considerably the kind of people who actually participate in our politics which is absolutely dominated by well-off middle class people who are career politicians and have done very little else... that has to end. //

An excellent point.

But as I have pointed out many times, in many debates, on many issues - in order to be in a position where you can effectively change things, to get to that position, you must have already proven beyond all doubt, that you categorically approve of things the way they are.

That Catch 22 will prevent any meaningful change, as those in power never use that power to change anything that will prevent them from having everything their own way.

[Untitled]

indeed andy it is a horrible bind. the two-party system is absolutely throttling this country and neither of them are going to surrender the thing that gives them a shot at power.

let's face it... most of us would not vote labour or tory at this point if we had more alternatives would we? and yet most of us trudge down to the polling booth to vote against the party we hate the most by supporting the party we hate the least. easy to defend in the short term but the long term result is a stagnant country.

[Canary42]

Why was it left to him to "resign the Whip". He should have been sacked and expelled from Parliament straight away. Why should his constituents be lumbered with an Independent - that's not what they voted for. 

He should also be prosecuted for treason for the information he gave away. He's admitted to giving away MP's telephone numbers and apologised - no doubt to try to deflect attention from any State Secrets he's possibly given away. A personal cover-up which should not be countenanced.

[Canary42]

/// supporting the party we hate the least ///

 

Exactly, that's how most GEs are decided (except hate is too strong a word, but the principle's there).

[ToraToraTora]

still could be worse, across the pond they've got Mogadon Joe V MAGA don!

[Untitled]

i have some sympathy for wragg's position as he was blackmailed but his willingness to share MPs phone numbers displays a fundamental lack of courage and self-serving attitude... he is not the kind of person who should have been elected in the first place - and the majority of people who voted in his constituency did not vote for him!!

[Canary42]

What else did he share - we should be told

[Khandro]

The last time I saw a kiss-curl like that was on Bill Haley.

[Old_Geezer]

I don't think you can identify who can "keep it in their pants", and in any case I'm more concerned about political leadership qualities than personal life. If they are ok about illicit affairs coming to light then that's up their conscience. Naming other potential targets to the bad guys is more of a stupidity thing, and the stupid ought not be able to reach MP status, or get selected by their party.

[ToraToraTora]

Was that at 1 or 2 or 3 oclock Khandro?

[ichkeria]

I am in favour of a PR system, but only for the reason that it might encourage people to vote for the candidate they really wanted, rather than tactically.

The argument that "most people didn't vote" for the winning candidate is not really the point. There are two ways around that, neither of which has anything to do with PR: either reduce the field to two candidates or use something like AV: the former is not viable, and the latter was suggested and rejected in a referendum.

Other than that I am against the idea of a general test for candidates. Individual parties should be doing this. For any candidate who turns out to be unsuitable as an MP they can be got rid of. As for Mr Wragg, it was right that he wasn't booted out immediately: everyone is entitled to a fair hearing first.

[Peter Pedant]

oh you mean - sort of MP mods?  - you can stand, you can't and that one, out out out !

and ugh I dont like HIM so he is out !

This sounds like a spiffing idea

[Peter Pedant]

 As for Mr Wragg, it was right that he wasn't booted out immediately: everyone is entitled to a fair hearing first.

well I think dishy rishi should have said: "is any of this true? and do you want to do anything?" He did apparently come out as gay at the very start ( of his tenure).

it is not so much the sending of the photos

but admitting that he had supplied numbers under pressure....