tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22057922.post4151233320347740193..comments2023-10-30T14:03:37.394+00:00Comments on Lindylooz Muze: Twisted Knickers, Nick Clegg and the BlogosphereLinda Jackhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05155438246679688058noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22057922.post-70119246101492319802008-03-08T02:50:00.000+00:002008-03-08T02:50:00.000+00:00Here was me thinking that MPs acted on manifesto's...Here was me thinking that MPs acted on manifesto's and core party principles and not what a whip tells them in any given week. At least that's how it should happen. MPs are involved in the process of defining manifestos and if they don't agree with significant parts of it what are they doing being an MP of that party anyway unless it's simply to have power in their safe constituency seat?<BR/><BR/>It's this idea that MPs are somehow working for the party rather than the people that is so abhorrent with the current system. MPs should generally vote with their party because they agree with the core party beliefs and the stance of the party doesn't vary wildly from them, and if the MP disagrees because their constituents have a different view then that should be their prerogative on the minority of cases that such an event happens.<BR/><BR/>To me it's not "politics" that makes such things as the rail roading through of policies happen, it's just plain bullshit.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22057922.post-64479981883120235892008-03-07T07:38:00.000+00:002008-03-07T07:38:00.000+00:00Alex, have you pinched yourself to make sure you a...Alex, have you pinched yourself to make sure you are OK, agreeing with me on nearly every word?!! Lee - that's politics. I can't see how the party system could possibly survive without whipping. The whole purpose of political parties is based on a concept of collective action, without any discipline that is lost. However, 3 line whips do not preclude individuals determining that they will risk being disciplined and vote against. It may be very frustrating at times, but I really don't know what kind of chaos would be the alternative.Linda Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05155438246679688058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22057922.post-67868272238135450842008-03-07T01:17:00.000+00:002008-03-07T01:17:00.000+00:00And so we should also just get over it when, hypot...And so we should also just get over it when, hypothetically, the ID card debate rolls in and Labour win the right to compulsion because of a three line whip?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22057922.post-19411493273354328502008-03-06T23:33:00.000+00:002008-03-06T23:33:00.000+00:00Very sensible post - I agree with pretty much ever...Very sensible post - I agree with pretty much every word!<BR/><BR/>I've been trying to write an article about when to whip and when not to... And realising how difficult a question it is ;-)<BR/><BR/>I disagreed with Nick's position on this, but it was after all the policy he ran on when he stood for Leader, so people can hardly say they didn't know what they were getting. Shame there wasn't a candidate with a different view, but I doubt more than a few Euro-nerds would have changed their vote either way; the real problem is that the party's never had the option to debate and vote on it on Conference, so the pressure of top-down decisions keeps bursting out in blogs and MPs' rebellions.Alex Wilcockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03364653159038708678noreply@blogger.com