a "simple" change

[jake-the-peg]

How would this country change if there was the simple change of making all parliamentry votes by secret ballot?

[ludwig]

It's an interesting question. these are just a few random thoughts..

Governments would probably be less stable because all the MPs who want to rebel against the party line but currently don't have the bottle would be able to do so. Prime Ministers would be in a weaker position.

There'd probably be more secret deals being done, more US style lobbying, more corruption.

MPs would never be accountable to the constituents or anyone else for how they voted. You could potentially have someone stand as a labour MP because the constituency had a massive labour majority, who then went on to vote with the tories on every single issue.

[Theland]

I'm with Tony Benn on this, democracy and transparency.
To move away from either or both is dangerous and as in the post above, would increase corruption.
It's a pity more politicians are not people of principle and vote according to the best interests of their constituents rather than the party.

[ruby27]

I wonder if the leaders of parties would have to work harder at policies and legislation being more popular/meanginful to their MP's. This might have positive results, such as MP's needing to be familiar with the matter rather than voting on party lines and reducing unecessary legislation. Hasn't this government or at least when Blair was PM, had put through more bills than any other administration.

[david1702198]

if their expenses claims are anything to go by they should be locked up and the f u c k i n g key threw away!!!

[jake-the-peg]

I think it would be the end of the party system which is behind every major democracy.

The whips can keep the MPs in line because they know how they've voted.

I think we're all so used to the party system we cannot imagine life without it but it could work providing the executive (cabinet) had sufficient power to act on various issues.

If they wanted more/ different powers they'd have to come to the house and make a case for those powers and either be voted them permanently, temporarily or denied them.

Actually it's not that different to the way things work now with "enabling legislation".

It's just that we've gotten used to governments getting everything they put in their manifesto through parliament and threatening a vote of no confidence if they don't get it.

We're actually bludgeoned into thinking that there is no other way that could possibly work, and nobody ever questions it.