An open letter reads: "Rather than representing constituents, the Council is concerned that your focus appears to have been firmly on your television show, upcoming book and political manoeuvres to embarrass the Government for not appointing you to the House of Lords."

cross-posted from: https://feddit.uk/post/791723

An open letter reads: "Rather than representing constituents, the Council is concerned that your focus appears to have been firmly on your television show, upcoming book and political manoeuvres to embarrass the Government for not appointing you to the House of Lords."

  • edent@lemmy.oneEnglish
    1·
    1 year ago

    That’s what the law says.

    The MP might not be selected by their party to stand in the next election. But there’s no law about MPs behaving in a way contrary to the wishes of their electorate.

    Indeed, how could an MP do their job properly if there was? If they’ve got a slim majority there would be almost endless recall petitions from opposition parties.

    If they voted against their party, they could be fired by the party against the wishes of the voters.

    What bar so you want to set for voters’ votes to be invalidated? At the moment we have criminal acts and suspension. What other thresholds would you add - and how would you stop people from abusing them?

    • wewbull@feddit.ukEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      It’s not for votes to be invalidated. It’s for votes to be retaken in light of new information.

      I agree you can’t have anybody raising a petition with no controls. That would be too chaotic, but if the councils in the constituency are calling for it, it seems reasonable to allow a petition / poll to recall.