Whatever it may be that either excites one about them, or conversely makes one run the proverbial mile, Nadine Dorries MP can fall into both camps and does so on many occasions.
Her latest post covers Alan Duncan, MP's outside interests and the 'standing' of the House of Commons. Discussing the after-effects of 'Expensegate' and how 'Parliament' will operate she says;
"We will witness the opening of a chasm between the electorate and those who legislate."
That statement alone shows that Nadine does not understand - firstly, the 'chasm' already exists and secondly, by use of the phrase 'those who legislate' she, like so many other MPs, seems to believe that somehow MPs are the 'rulers' of the people, rather than the servants. A further point is the use of the word 'legislate' - on what do they 'legislate' when 75/80 percent of our laws derive from Brussels?
Complaining about MPs now having to disclose their second incomes and that this will deter 'ordinary' people from becoming MPs, resulting in only the rich doing so, yet again Nadine misses the basic point. She does not appear to have grasped the basic fact that if power is truly devolved down to the electorate, if MPs truly serve their electorate and are answerable to that electorate by use of open primaries and a re-call system; then it does not matter whether any potential MP is rich or poor, or whether or not they do have second occupations. Perhaps another reason for MPs having second jobs is that, due the lack of areas in which they can legislate, they need second occupations to fill their day!
Discussing the 'Alan Duncan' affair, she complains that MPs don't now trust the media and possibly individuals too. If MPs do not wish to be 'ridiculed', perhaps they should engage brain prior to opening mouth , or putting fingers to keyboard!
Perhaps Nadine needs to take a refresher course on the subject of how our democracy is supposed to function - before the Conservative and Labour parties, each in their own way, emasculated it!
2 hours ago