Display:
Nope, because then they never get to be effective. It takes a couple of years to learn the ropes before you can do anything. They'd end up being even more at the mercy of a professional class of "support staff".

You're doomed anyway you do it. You have to change the environment the parliament operates in - which means the ideological and media environment.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon Feb 1st, 2010 at 06:36:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
To begin with, a reduction of the number of MPs will hopefully contribute to a more transparent, influential and infinitely more efficient Parliament.
by hitchhiker on Mon Feb 1st, 2010 at 06:59:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Reducing the number of MPs means that they´ll represent an even larger group of voters. Which probably means that they´ll be even less inclined to help any "minority" (poor or disadvantaged people for example).

Not to mention that a larger "voting district" probably means you need more money for ads, flyers or election staff in an election.

And of course fewer MPs means that interest groups need to "influence" fewer people to advance their interests.
Coupled with the larger " voting districts" mentioned above this seems to be a recipe for larger "interest group" influence.

Just look at the US Senate.

by Detlef (Detlef1961_at_yahoo_dot_de) on Mon Feb 1st, 2010 at 06:17:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series