Bigga
Well-Known Member
Perhaps the problem with the system is how you have described it, it's based upon voting for a person to represent you however in reality it's centred around one person who you do not vote for. Only the people of Uxbridge voted for Boris Johnson and less than 0.1% of the country voted for him to be the Tory party leader and PM.
It shouldn't be the case but it's a fact that Boris Johnson or any PM for that matter wields far more power than your MP. A party leader has the power to effectively eliminate your MP if they vote in their constituents interests and against the party, this is where the disconnect exists between the voter and the MP. It's because MP's suddenly are forced to consistently vote with their party and not necessarily their constituents or else face consequences.
Just now for example example we have a ridiculous situation where our next PM will likely promise tax cuts just months after that same person voted within the last regime to increase taxes. How is a system that allows this behaviour representative let alone democratic? Did anyone vote for tax increases and then tax cuts 6 months later?
So what is my point, ultimately I think we're kidding ourselves. We do live in a democracy but only to the point where every few years we get to vote for someone. That's where it ends, what that person then does once they're elected is a completely different matter. Most people truly vote for the party and PM who sets the agenda however in 2 months time we'll have a new PM with a new agenda that no-one voted for and the MP's will vote with that PM, it's just farcical really.
The only single issue I've ever seen where democracy has truly been exercised is Brexit and the reason why is because that decision was taken away from MP's. That's why it attracts so much energy on either side because actually this time your vote stood for something and actually did make a big difference.
This is an excellent response.