There is no way back for representative democracy in its present form.

[Millennium3]

I would be interested to learn members views of the following proposal:

The Leveson Inquiry, set up to investigate media ethics and journalism practices following the News of The World hacking scandal, has raised an issue that fundamentally undermines the concept of representative democracy in the UK – in its present form.

Prior to the Inquiry, it had become clear that our system of government had little or no democratic content apart from to decide which of the two alternating dictatorships would be in office. Any that might have remained was killed off when Gordon Brown ratified the Lisbon Treaty and placed the UK in political union with the other EU member states.

This act served to underline the then existing democratic deficiency, since, at the time of ratification, polls showed that more than 80% wanted a referendum on whether the Treaty should be ratified and two thirds were against it being signed.

What the Leveson Inquiry has demonstrated is that it is impossible to know whether those standing as candidates at elections are being bribed, corrupted or blackmailed by a rich media mogul [or anyone else for that matter] to insure the candidate, once elected, does their bidding.

Having reached this point, the only certain way to remedy the currently debased system is for the representative to be directly accountable to the people they purport to represent and to provide a system whereby the constituents can sack their representative – if they fail to live up to expectations.

MPs are selected for their well-paid jobs by the constituents and it is their taxes that pays the MP’s salary. It is therefore right and proper that these same people have the right to dismiss them if, over a period of time [6 monthly invervals?] they are dissatisfied with their work. This is how paid employment works in every other circumstance – why not for those who choose a political career?

In last resort, the only valid judgement of an elected representatives actions, whether bribed, corrupted, blackmailed or as pure as the driven snow, is that of those who elected them.

The development of the internet has provided systems that would allow representatives to be publicly questioned by their constituents, their responses debated and for a vote to be taken on whether the representative should retain their post – through an internet forum with a a polling capacity. If the constituents were given the right to question and sack their representative, through this medium, at regular intervals – representatives would be far more concerned about the views of the voters and true democracy would gradually start to replace our existing deeply flawed political system.

http://theghostofthomaspaine.wordpre...-present-form/

Seems that the Speaker is also concerned with the effect of our current system.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17973303

[internetcynic]

John Bercow can hardly talk, he's indistinguishable from his idiot predecessor, Gorbals Mick. they as both biassed, partial and enriching there own lives and that of there spouses with public money. The only difference is that Bercow if even more indulgent and full of his own self importance that Gorbals Mick.

With ref to the original post, you cant tell if your MP is corrupt, not until after the event. Its the same problem as with bosses. If I set on a welder at 6 AM Monday, i know by about 12 pm on tuesday if hes any bloody good or not. The problem with bosses (and MP's) is it might take five years to suss out the morons and incompetents.

The solution is to change the pay, work and conditions of MP's so that it attracts people who want to do it for the public good, rather than viewing it as a method of enriching there bank accounts. Drop the pay to £30k a year for a start, provide a state owned flat for them to live in near parliament, provide a Ford Mondeo for them to drive round in (or rail warrants), and provide staff from a centrally operated pool. No house allowances, no travel allowance, very limited expenses, a subsidised supermarket and restaurant, and thats it.