Saturday, December 31, 2011

Yeah, that'll sort it out. Not.

As much as I enjoy slagging off our political masters, there are one or two decent people in the House of Commons; for them, it must be pretty galling to be lumped in with their lazy, venal and corrupt colleagues—not just by bloggers, but in "proper" studies too.

"Eh? What the fuck are you talking about?" I hear you cry...

Well, it seems that a study by the University of Nottingham has worked out that the MP intake of 2010 are possibly the most rebellious since the dinosaurs. Or something.
The study by the University of Nottingham says MPs have become more rebellious and independent-minded in recent years. The Parliaments elected in 2001 and 2005 produced record numbers of revolts, but the 2010 Parliament is already "easily outstripping" them, say Philip Cowley and Mark Stuart, who conducted the research.

They say the 43 per cent rebellion rate is "simply without parallel in the post-war era", and is even more dramatic because the Parliament is still in its early stages, when new MPs tend to be more acquiescent. "One of the most noticeable features about the 2010 cohort, especially on the Conservative side, is how troublesome they have been," the authors say.

Yes, well, good for them, on the whole. The top five rebellious MPs listed—which includes your humble Devil's blog mascot, I'm proud to say—are generally on the side of decency and, more importantly, their constituents.

And they are, by and large, decent freedom-minded people (if not outright libertarians) who think that Westminster needs a good shake-up.

But these rebels must be mortified at the study's proposed solution for making our fat-headed Prime Minister's life easier...
"Over time the ranks of the rebellious new MPs will swell, unless the Government can create a raft of new jobs to keep its backbenchers occupied..."

So, basically, a bunch of idiots from the University of Nottingham think that David Cameron should invent a whole load of new make-work jobs in order to shut these people up?

How?

Do these people think that men like Nuttall, Reckless, Baker or Carswell can be bought off with some pointless minor ministerial distraction? Or perhaps they think that the jobs should be loaded onto the rebels regardless, so that they are too busy to vote?

I have chatted quite a bit to the last two on that list, and I am pretty damn sure that neither of them could be bribed in this manner.

The way to get people like Baker or Carswell to vote for the government is for the government to actually enact some laws that, cuts government spending, unfetters the free market and increases freedom for the people of this nation.

Other than that, I am pretty fucking sure that the corrupt idiots at the University of Nottingham are on to a loser. Which is why your humble Devil is happy to renew his support for Steve Baker MP for another year...

In the meantime, however, it is hardly surprising that a bunch of academics should suggest that free speech and independent thinking can be stifled by the awarding of a meaningless sinecure—it's just one of the reasons why our education system is so utterly shite.

3 comments:

Ed Moore said...

I think you've come up with a major mis-interpretation of this.

Try a value-free analysis of the statement, not as a recommendation but as a statement of fact.

Whether or not you think the creation of jobs for rebellious backbenchers is a good thing do you really think it wouldn't be effective?

Of course it'd be effective.

Baker and Carswell might be immune; whoop-de-do, that's two.

Most politicians are self-serving scum.

I refer you to the superb poster by Obnoxio The Clown;
over the photo of Cameron he laid the words,
'I'm not insane like that fucker Brown ,but I'm still a politician so I'm still a fucking cunt.'

Stick to that view and you'll be right rather more often than you'll be wrong.

JuliaM said...

"Do these people think that men like Nuttall, Reckless, Baker or Carswell can be bought off with some pointless minor ministerial distraction? "

Well, they know it'd work for them, so why not assume it'd work for MPs too?

Anonymous said...

Puzzled as to why you think the Nottingham Uni academics were saying buying them off is a good thing. Cowley usually presents his analysis neutrally.

As to whether they can be bought off, why even bother? They're all utterly ineffective, even Carswell. As Richard North says, they're a serious hinderance, not a help.