When one considers the inane comments that are being emitted by our Members of Parliament where Brexit is concerned, those of us who understand ‘matters EU’ can only grow increasingly frustrated by the day.
From this source we are informed that the main functions of Parliament are to:
- Check and challenge the work of the Government (scrutiny)
- Make and change laws (legislation)
- Debate the important issues of the day (debating)
- Check and approve Government spending (budget/taxes)
In order to do any of the above it is necessary that those performing the acts of checking and challenging the work of the Government, making and changing laws, debating the important issues of the day and checking and approving Government spending had any knowledge of just how to go about that. If only MPs had an understanding of the basics about which they would have us believe they do, perhaps we would not be in the mess that they have gotten us into.
When we have MPs who are unable to differentiate between ‘Single Market’ and ‘Customs Union’ – and conflate the two; who are unable – or unwilling – to understand the difference between membership of EFTA and full membership of the EU; who seem to have no understanding of how long trade deals require to come to fruition; who appear not to know the origin and process of how international standards come to be implemented; who have no understanding of the amount of law, inherited through our membership of the EU – with their blessing – that needs to be unraveled; a few questions arise:
On what basis should we listen to their utterances; and more importantly, on what basis should we continue to fund their livelihood and thus their careers? If, as so many MPs claim, they have a career as an MP, perhaps there is a case for an investigation by Trading Standards? If, as is obviously apparent, the people of the United Kingdom have some of their number masquerading as ‘rulers’ under representative democracy, then perhaps it is time we changed the system of democracy whereby said masqueraders are ‘shown the door’?
Readers may be thinking I have overlooked the part that our media play in the problems we suffer where our politicians are concerned – which I hasten to assure is not the case. Journalists (Christopher Booker excepted) are but ‘ticks’ feeding off ‘host animals’ (aka the political class), the latter ‘suffering’ said predators because of the benefit they, the host, gains.
A little dose of direct democracy would not only control the parasites, while making the host a pointless feeding ground for the former – and also bringing the latter under domestic control.
*A saying attributed to Laurel and Hardy, a comedic double act of the 1920/1940s – in which regard MPs bear a striking resemblance.
Afterthought: Far be it for me to ‘declare war’ on any other blogger(s), but a thought arises: it is all very well to criticize politicians for their lack of knowledge in regard to ‘matters EU’, but it seems pointless when said blogger(s), who ‘usurped’ the idea of introducing direct democracy (and then did nothing with that ‘usurpation’ over a period of 4 years) – which after all would negate the utterances and power that politicians undoubtedly have – then proceed to totally ignore, or mention that the introduction of direct democracy would ‘put said politicians back in their box’. Perhaps priorities need reviewing?