Content provided in partnership with
The Origins of the Modern MP. . - Reviews - The Role of the Member of Parliament Since 1868 - book review
Contemporary Review, March, 2002 by Robert S. Redmond
The Role of the Member of Parliament since 1868. Michael Rush. Oxford University Press. [pounds sterling]30.00. 239 pages. ISBN 0-19-827577-3.
This book is based on a thorough study of Parliament after many years spent in research. Michael Rush, without doubt, has knowledge gained from long-standing membership of the Study of Parliament Group founded in 1964. The group consists of officers of both Houses and academics with particular interests and contacts with MPs. Here is, without doubt, an erudite history of the period from 1868 when the Party system as we know it began.
- Most Popular Articles in News
- The Ten Best Laptop bags
- Tata plans cheapest-ever car for Indian market
- GLOBALIZATION AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF UNDERDEVELOPMENT OF THE THIRD WORLD
- Corn is good for you; Corn is not only a tasty treat, but also a cereal that ...
- THE 50 BEST STYLISH HANDBAGS TO CARRY
- More »
Parliament has evolved gradually - sometimes imperceptibly - so that it is a very different place from what it was. If this sounds like a contradiction, one need only refer to a Hansard of any time in the nineteenth century to realise how different are the routines of today. Parliament has grown from an original English base and has absorbed the unions of Scotland and Ireland. Mr Rush does not mention the recent devolution of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland or the arrival of the E.U. He does not prognosticate on those things, although they are already important. So is the custom of debates in Westminster Hall.
The author rehearses the old arguments about whether MPs are delegates or representatives rightly quoting Edmund Burke. In his final chapter he reports on surveys of MPs in 1994 and 1997. They were asked to declare their priorities - Country, Constituency or Party. His tables show changes and differences in the answers of Conservative and Labour MPs. It does not seem to have occurred to him or the questioners that every MP must believe that his/her Party should be in power for the good of the Country and that others are wrong. Given that kind of faith, what is the difference in priority between party and Country?
To some, politics is a vocation. But, we are asked, does this mean the MP lives FOR politics or ON politics? Can it not be, as suggested, that MPs live for the political life and simply accept the pay for it? A further question posed in the book is whether politics is a profession or a career. There is no professional qualification and no code of conduct.
Do all MPs hope for office? The book quotes statistics about this and suggests there is not always a burning ambition. Some MPs, interviewed on entry into Parliament, give evasive answers. Some are modest, but can they always be taken seriously? The backbenches were right for me and I relished the freedom to dabble in any subject. I feel entitled, therefore, to doubt what these statistics infer. Far too many MPs, to my knowledge, see themselves as failures if they are not in government quickly.
The evolution of procedures is well explained. While, today, some complain about the pressures from the Whips' Office and about a Government's ability to secure the passage of legislation, it is right that we should understand how it has all come about. Obstruction by the Irish Nationalists led by Parnell and John Redmond, for example, brought the closure motion and time table or 'guillotine'. It is interesting that Gladstone failed to realise what was coming. It is reported by Rush that he said 'They are Gentlemen, they will never go to that length'. In other words, they would respect traditions. Joseph Ronayne (MP for Cork City, 1872-6) had no such inhibitions. 'We will never make any impression on the House until we interfere in English business'. By such methods they forced their aim - Home Rule - into attention, but changed the ways of Parliament for ever.
The history of plans and procrastination over the Lords' Reform is well described. One wonders, however, whether recent proposals will survive. There is already opposition from all sides. It is not long since a strange coalition between Enoch Powell and Michael Foot made Harold Wilson put his proposals on the shelf. Could something similar happen again? We already have a Conservative proposal for an Upper House in which eighty per cent of the members are elected.
In several parts of the book, Mr Rush writes about what he calls the 'scrutiny role' of MPs. In this, he has missed something very important -- the work of Party Groups or Committees. They play a part in the scrutiny of legislation and the formulation of policies. In the Conservative Party, there is the Twenty-Two Committee with a group for every ministry. No doubt the same applies to Labour. These groups consist of MPs with special interest in their subjects. They scrutinise everything with care and it is from here that the Whips learn of informed backbench views. Measures are often amended -- even withdrawn -- before they reach public notice. It is strange that one who has studied Parliament as has Mr Rush should overlook such an important function. It may be that until one has sat on the green leather benches, and has joined the chatter in the tea room and the smoking room, one does not really know what makes MPs tick.
When an MP, Robert Redmond was Secretary and later Vice-Chairman of the Conservative Employment Committee during the passage of the Industrial Relations Act in 1971 and later when other employment policies were under discussion.
COPYRIGHT 2002 Contemporary Review Company Ltd.
COPYRIGHT 2002 Gale Group
