The Virtual Gigolo

So now I belatedly find that Associated Newspapers had people at a Nazi themed party… tsk tsk, we knew their integrity standards were poor but that soon after the accusations against the Mayor is frankly ridiculous.

The recent attempt by the incombent Labour government to force through anti-terrorism legislation has brought to mind my major issue with current politics. The use of the term “rebels” to describe those who went against party lines in the votes is at the heart of the problem. Why is someone who votes along with his own feelings (or possibly those of his constituency) a rebel, in a democracy that runs directly based on those votes? Why should the government be able to force through a vote by instructing their members to vote a certain way? It seems to me that with the large number of so called rebels, and the small majority, had MPs had a truly free vote (with no feeling of obligation to their party) the vote would have been a clear no, making the actual result undemocratic.

This of course does apply to opposition parties, why should an opposition party instruct its members to all vote against a government proposal?

This country needs to move to a more free form of representation, with a higher degree of local referenda to help an MP decide how to vote on a particular issue (with the possibility to vote along their own lines based on information available where necessary). I’m not (yet) for a fully direct democracy, but the current system borders on being autocratic if a party has a large enough majority.