Common Decency

I agree that this type of bullying should not be allowed, we vote for local MPs who we believe have our interests at heart.

This system is in desperate need of reform as it clearly violates democracy. It's shocking how an MP is held hostage to patronage; vote with the party and be granted favours, vote with common decency (if in contrast) and those favours are withheld. We voters elect representatives and they should represent us. Not the demands of the powerful and affluent minority.

Mass rebellion against this system is required. Only then can those matters close to your heart be addressed with democracy.

"My notion of democracy is that under it the weakest should have the same opportunity as the strongest" - Ghandi

I love this initiative, and hope it works out well, but I do have to point out that here in the states, we have no Whips, or no obligation to toe the party line. Obviously, it's not working - we are in a much bigger mess than you are! Our biggest problem is the blind allegiance to the people and corporations that finance all politicians, regardless of party.

The whip system was clearly abused during the Badger Debates. Worst was where the Tory/LibDem coalition knew they would lose. They ordered MP's to stay away. This was an abuse of democracy. When Labour government faced a similar loss of a 'non-binding' vote. They still d their MP's attend and moreover they honoured the result - Ghurka's. There have been few rebellions this Parliament on the ConDem benches. Which to me says more about lack of backbone.

An interesting article though by Paul Cowley (LSE academic) on his analysis of voting and monitoring of MPs willing to disobey the whip during Labour 2001 - 2005 parliament. People like Dennis Skinner, Kelvin Hopkins etc. There were more MPs willing to defy the whip for half a Century and the biggest rebellion since the Corn Laws. Thus, where there is independence of mind and an issue campaigned well enough on, people can see results.

Cowley, P. 2005. These aren't poodles, they're the most rebellious MPs ever. The Guardianhttp://www.theguardian.com/politics/2005/oct/20/labour.uk.

Whipping is anti democratic.. We need to know who voted for what and who bothered to turn up. Without whips perhaps they would listen to and engage in worthwhile debate with the introduction of the occasional fact.
You are correct we vote for a candidate not a rubber stamp.

This one is really easy: all parliamentary votes to be anonymous.

Totally agree with regard to party whip system. Why should there ever be any reason for an MP to do anything other than to vote on each issue on behalf of their constituents? To subvert this through the whip system is corruption of democracy right at the heart of the system. In effect it means that only a handful of people i.e. senior party leaders actually have a vote and the vast bulk of the 600 odd MPs are just doing what they are told. I believe this is the single most important issue to address to regain trust.

A clear example of this corruptive effect in action is the rise of the SNP. For decades Scottish Labour voters have become more and more disillusioned with Labour because the MPs have carried out a party agenda which has not been aligned with local needs resulting in migration to the SNP, believed to be more closely aligned. However exactly the same effect will eventually cause disillusion with the SNP as its Party interests become more powerful than those of the constituents.

In any other walk of life the risk of a conflict between Party interests and those of the constituents would be seen as a massive conflict of interest and would be outlawed. In this most important of forums it is regarded as normal and not a problem not just amongst politicians but also all those closely associated such as the journalist community.

So I very much agree that this seems like a good idea: what, after all, is the point of delegating our democratic power in the Commons by electing an MP, if that MP is then disempowered in this way?

However, there is a wrinkle: we also elect governments based on their manifestos, and in order to implement these manifestos, legislation must be approved by parliament. Doesn't making every parliamentary vote a "conscience vote" thus make it much, much harder for an elected government to manage the tactics required to implement their manifesto and introduce a huge obstacle to maintaining a consistent strategic direction?

What are Common Decency's thoughts on this? I would dearly like to think that there is a reform of the existing whip system that could go some way to solving the conundrum, but I suspect it needs a more nuanced response than the change suggested - although I'm very open to being convinced otherwise.

There is an interesting article from the 2009 in The Guardian which suggests that perhaps curtailing the whips' powers to arbitrarily hand out and withdraw privileges from MPs would be helpful.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/may/20/parliament-reform-whips

They should all be whipped. Cromwell has turned over in his grave!

Wholeheartedly agree. MPs are elected by the public to represent THEM and to put their constituents' points of view/wishes first, not the wishes of the party to which they belong. The whole parliamentary system needs overhauling as it is archaic for the 21st century. The whips are just bullies and in any other environment, just would not be tolerated.

Totally Agree with doing away with the unfair and Blackmailing/Bullying of MP's by the Party System of using Whips. All Votes should be a matter of conscience, Not what the Party wants, or voting against issues just because issue raised by different Party. Just voting for an issue because it's what the Party wants is Evil.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jul/13/whips-secrets-black-books-threats-child-abuse-inquiry-politics

This link shows how far Whips will go to reign in MPs. Instead of bringing in the Police to investigate child abuse, it has been covered up and used to blackmail MPs for political gain. The system has long been corrupt. Its time for change.

I agree, and think it's important we don't just drive the whip system underground.

Amen!

The Whip system should definitely be demolished.

Please feel free to comment on this subject and remember it is important to vote for your candidates, follow this link https://www.commondecency.org.uk/may-7th-2015/2015-candidates-2. Thank you again.

I'm satisfied to seek out numerous useful information here in the submit, we want work out extra strategies in this regard, thank you for sharing.
writing ssee

I just considered it best source from where you can get the ideas that how they have managed to get things done in front of them likewise the decency of the website and they launches. essays

If electoral system gives you one vote for both candidate and party, then the candidate is heavily dependent on the party for re-election.
Give the voter one vote for the party and its manifesto, and a quite separate vote for the candidate, even if they are identified as party candidates, the candidate can be elected on their own merits. Similarly the votes for the party can truly reflect the level of support for their policies.
This would give the candidate a measure of independence and added democratic legitimacy.
We could vote for the honest hard working decent candidates, and spurn the weak candidates without having to vote against the party who has the best policies.