Here's why I think there should always be a by-election when an MP defects, like Dan Poulter did.
1. MPs (except independents) stand on a party manifesto. Those are the policies the constituency electorate voted for. Now, without a vote, the MP's policies have changed.
1. MPs (except independents) stand on a party manifesto. Those are the policies the constituency electorate voted for. Now, without a vote, the MP's policies have changed.
2. Research shows 75% of people can't name their local MP. Tragic, but true. So quite clearly they are voting for a party, not a person. It doesn't matter what the official version of events is: voting for a party is self evidently the reality.
3. "The people voted for a party, not a person" was the excuse for not holding a general election when PM changed between elections (see the last 4 PMs). Can't have it both ways! So: by-election for Poulter, or give us the GE we should have had when you changed to Sunak
4. Thought experiment: imagine the riots if 400 UKIP MPs had been elected, and then every one of them detected to LibDems and voted in parliament to stay in the EU. I know: crazily extreme example. But it demonstrates my point.
5. I know that technically we elect a person, not a party. But in the real-world, we DEFINITELY elect a party. If it wasn't so, your voting slip wouldn't say "Ronald Plank, (Conservative)". And it does.
This isn't a party political argument. It's not targeting Tories or Labour. I just think it's bad for democracy that this shit happens, and we all pretend the views of voters are still being reflected. It reduces trust in the system at a time when it's already at rock bottom.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
