members of parliament

[garf123gsd]

what with all the lying,philandering,taxing the life out of us
members of parliament are still called"right honourable gentlemen"
i would hate to meet "the right dis-honourable gentlemen" lord knows what shinanigans they would get up to!!!!!!!!

[spinchimp]

And just what is the question here?

[unruliejulie]

Oh spinchimp. you're back, i have missed you!!!! It's been a while!!!
I think garf123gsd would like to know why they are STILL called right honourable, when most are obviously dishonourable!!! I think he/she is a little dishollusioned with parliament! I can't answer that question, but the name doesn't really reflect the true picture!

[jake-the-peg]

Well maybe members of Parliament have to reflect the real men and women who put them there.

Cromwell tried a "Parliament of the saints", personally appointed good men - it didn't end happily

[sp1814]

Perhaps MPs could be referred to by whichever scandal they've been involved in....

"Will the alcoholic wife-beating representative from XXX constituancy like to respond to this point?"

It would certainly make BBC Parliament more viewer-friendly.

[spinchimp]

julie -hello darling, so glad you missed me (even though you are a fibbing minx).

[LazyGun]

Im sure this has been asked / discussed on here before, but given the level of sceptiscm and cynicism in general about MPs, does anyone else think we have altogether too many of them?

Other countries (in particular the US) seem to manage perfectly well on considerably less, and they each have a much larger constituency. Perhaps if the number of constituencies was reduced in the UK, it would keep them busy and therefore less likely to fall prey to temptation.

The other benefit of course would the reduction in costs on the public purse.... rough calculation, each MP gets around �100,000 per year in salary and expenses. There are currently around 640 or so MPs, so thats a cost to the public finances of �64 million? Does anyone else think we the great british public are being ripped off, or do you think we get value for money from our MPs?

[jake-the-peg]

So that'd be �1 a year from each of us in the UK then?

I guess if you pay peanuts you get monkeys!

[unruliejulie]

Not fibbing spinchimp, honest, you make me laugh and i did notice you hadn't been around so i must have been missing you!!

[andy-hughes]

They are not all called 'Right Honourable' - that title is only for MP's are members of the Privvy Council - others are referred to as 'the Honourable lady / gentleman' or as'my honourable friend'.

This is simply part of tradition and courtesy that informs the workings of the Commons, designed to stop it all degenerating into a free-for-all. For the same reasons, MP's are not allowed to applaud anything said in the House, which is why they wave thier Order Papers to signal their approval.

[LazyGun]

Looking at the costs that way jake (just �1 a year from all of us), I suppose it could be argued they are value for money, not least in terms of all the newspaper column inches and discussions they provoke :)

Still think we have far too many of em though...