MPs should ask what they have done to preserve Parliament's stature
Fraser Nelson 2:18pm
I do feel for Her Majesty. This ordeal should be foisted on her only after an election. Having to read out the New Labour newspeak was bad enough, but the Brownian argot is dreadful. I do love the way she did it without any feeling - with a wearisome look in her eye - and the way Prince Philip was caught on camera apparently joking about throwing the speech in the bin. It was a pretty bald speech: just 13 pieces of legislation versus 21 in last year’s. After years of worsening child poverty, even by Brown’s narrow measures, he now legislates to “abolish” it by 2020 – as if that will achieve anything. Put that alongside some of the legislation announced for the banks, and it adds up to a whole load of gesture politics.
There’s also plenty here that will please Mr Brown’s trades union paymasters in the form of new regulation for businesses. In a recession, the last thing businesses need is more legislation that will provide a disincentive to hiring, such as flexible working legislation. While the Business Rates Supplement Bill will allow councils a new way to tax companies, again the last thing the economy needs. There is so little to help the economy in the Queen’s Speech, and so much to cause potential harm.
In my political column for tomorrow’s Spectator, I say that the raid on Damian Green’s office was certainly an insult to Parliament – but the worst insults have been made by the MPs themselves, thanks to their behaviour in recent years. Despite the honourable exceptions (Norman Baker, etc), the outside world will see Parliament yet again getting worried about its own privileges. The worst damage done to Parliament’s stature did not come from the Met but from MPs voting to keep the John Lewis list; booting half their powers to Brussels and the Celtic fringe; and failing to use their remaining powers to hold the executive to account.
Consider this: the parliamentary session which the Queen opened today will last for just 128 days out of 365 – ie, more holidays than any session for almost 30 years. Pretty soon our MPs will be off for a 24-day Christmas holiday: the sort of break that the people whose taxes pay their salaries can only dream of. This is what brings Parliament into disrepute. And while our honourable members vent outrage over the Green issue, they should look at the problem in the round. Parliament does need saving. But it will take more than keeping the Met at bay.
P.S. Simon Hughes summed it up well in the House last week: “When people are going to be losing their jobs, for us to be giving ourselves holidays, an extended Christmas and New Year holiday, it is a break from this place, for the House of Commons not to come back to work from July to October, I think out there gives the most adverse reputation to the House of Commons.”
Previous
Comments
m addison
December 3rd, 2008 2:43pmFraser - Speaking of the Queen, have you noticed the events currently unfolding in Canada, where the Governor General is about to be put in a position that has alarming similarites to the Whitlam affair in Oz back in the 70's - and potentially the UK in the event of a hung Parliament?
biggestaspidistra
December 3rd, 2008 2:56pm" Despite the honourable exceptions (Norman Baker, etc), the outside world will see Parliament yet again getting worried about its own privileges."
I think the mistake is in thinking that this has been an insult to MPs. It has been an insult to the British nation. No one is in any confusion about the calibre of our current MPs.
Also, here and elsewhere I read that the media elite need to communicate to the general public what is happening and how dangerous this is. The public have been aware of this dangerous slide for some years now. If not before certainly a year ago when their organs went up for grabs, just as they saw the financial crash approaching years before it surprised the press and Westminster.
Chris
December 3rd, 2008 7:38pmActually I think it is a good idea that Parliament only sits for 128 days. They would only pass more stupid Laws if they were there for longer.
hadrian
December 3rd, 2008 8:56pmAs a Scot I certainly wonder as I lie in bed at night just why I pay for two sets of almost equally useless MPs. However at least the devolved 'Celtic fringe' lot have a fair old whack of stuff to do...just what precisely do we need our Scots Westminster lot for? Not a great deal, except to vote on specific interests of our long-suffering neighbours', south of the border, from whom they receieve no popular endorsement and to snatch a few baw bees for the hame country. Devolution, in the U.K. anyway, really is the worst of both worlds, I fear.
Jeremy
December 3rd, 2008 11:51pmI agree with you, Fraser. I too, feel for the Queen.
Can you imagine what it must be like for a person of sensibility to have to sit there mouthing NuLabour's plastic and hollow 1984-speak? Almost the perfect torture, I should have thought. Given the circumstances, the wearisome look in the eye and the absence of feeling in the voice were probably quite genuine.
I'm sure that Prince Philip's cracks on these occasions are a great source of humour and reassurance to Her Majesty.
Ron
December 4th, 2008 4:11pmGood old Philip. He knows the value of this occasion, and shows it.
The serious point that Fraser makes about what MP's have done is very well made. They should recognise that although most people are very angry about the police raid they are even more angry about all the privileges, and perqs they cling to. Where is the leader who can voice this anger? If the Conservatives have one he should step forward and show himself.
Sepoy Agent
December 4th, 2008 9:42pmI dunno. I've always believed Parliament worked best when it was just called up when a vote of money was needed for a war or otherwise, and the rest of the time returned to their country estates. That stops them interfering with the rest of us.