The Personal Responsibility of MPs

This is a subject fraught with danger. We have seen how the expenses scandal has decimated certain portions of the three major parties. When I say ‘decimated’, I mean that, roughly, a tenth of the MPs from ALL parties have been removed, and that a few of them, the worst offenders, have been publicly castigated. What is important, however, is that they were held to be responsible for the actions. 

I think that the days of ‘immunity’ for MPs from personal liability must pass. The damage that a few MPs can do to the economy and to personal freedom is far to great for them to get away scot-free when they personally, and acting as a group,  knowingly advocate falsities. It is not an excuse to claim that they were misled since they had every right, and indeed a duty, to check the facts. There is no excuse, for legislators, to refuse to check the facts. Remember that the Zealots in the Health Dept are not the legislators. Let us imagine a situation where the legislators, MPs, failed to check the facts and emitted a law which banned ELECTRICITY. 

Silly? Yes, but if the ‘greens’ had their way, then electricity would become a commodity in short supply, and only available to to “the better sorte”. Serfs must make do with candles. Imagine a situation where MPs voted to end the general availability of electricity? Such a vote might be essential for one reason or another, but it could only be justified if each and every MP was personally convinced that such an action was absolutely necessary. The evidence would have to be actual and overwhelming. 

A serious failure of our system of government is the ease with which MPs can claim immunity from the consequences of their actions. Odd, is it not?, Since I am responsible for the consequences of my actions, even though the consequences are almost always tiny, it is odd that  MPs are not responsible, even though their actions might cruel, vindictive, divisive, unscientific, nasty, etc. 


The WHO has meeting after meeting after meeting, and its tobacco control dept has ceased to have any scientific justification. It has now become a simple propaganda machine. And this machine is extremely expensive. 


There must be some sort of legal redress about the lies and distortions, and upon the readiness of MPs to accept the lies and distortions as thought they were true. 

There is only one FAILING DEVICE in the short term (disregarding the ‘stink’ surrounding our silly and outdated political establishment). The FAILING DEVICE is the CABINET. It is beyond my comprehension that a girl, aka ‘health minister’, can stand up in Parliament and commit the CABINET to Standardised Packaging. It is beyond my comprehension. (By the way, the same would apply to a ‘boy’ (such as ‘the boy Clegg’). 

No wonder our political system stinks. For years and years, THE CABINET has heaped the blame on individual junior ministers, and then chucked them out when it turns out that they were wrong.

If we have this disgusting, filthy, stinking system of government, which uses a CABINET, then it is for the CABINET to be identified as the originator of laws and regulations. Junior Health Minister Girls (or Boys) do not originate legislation. Nor do the ‘experts’. Only the CABINET originate laws. 


Rambling somewhat tonight, I must admit. But not totally unrealistic.



2 Responses to “The Personal Responsibility of MPs”

  1. beobrigitte Says:

    Yes, the personal responsibilities of MPs – that If MPs remember what this is!

    But then, my bet is that they don’t. Didn’t a junior go over the heads of this government because she feared the anti-smoking brigade would be knocked back? WHY has Soubry still got a job in government in the first place? She should have been sacked and stood trial!

    • Junican Says:

      Subry (deliberately) failed to put her plans before the commons scrutiny committee before rushing off to Luxembourg and committing the UK government. She claimed that she didn’t have time, even though that committee had been asking for details for some months.
      She was transferred from health to defence. Cameron did not dare sack her because it would imply that he had made a mistake in appointing her. Remember that he had already had to sack Milton. Also, had he sacked her, it might have had repercussions upon the EU directive. Transferring her was the easy way out.
      Another fine mess ….

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: