Infantile representatives

A few days ago MPs were heard to cheer when a Labour amendment to terminate the 1% cap on public sector pay was defeated. This post is not about the politics of that decision, but the behaviour itself. Behaviour that would and should be challenged in many ‘lesser’ institutions than the Houses of Parliament and which, in my opinion, devalues the House itself.

Politics is currently, like it or not, an adversarial process. I might wish otherwise. Perhaps a more collaborative, consensual, partnership…approach might be desirable (especially in a house with no inbuilt absolute majority) but that seems far away given the current predispositions of most of our politicians. Too many seem to have too much to win/lose, both personally and politically, to want to work with others to seek the best for the  country rather than the best for themselves or their party (which of course has the only correct answers tot he many challenges we face).

I think that thoughts on the adversarial system itself had better wait for another day, with the exception of the unfortunate behaviour that seems to be associated with ‘winning’ – namely this tendency to boorish (my judgement) behaviour towards the losers.

Not only do we have the Commons (OK, just over half of them) cheering when civil servants’ pay is restrained, but listen to almost any Parliamentary Questions (especially PMQs) and  the ‘yah boo’ brigade are out in force on both sides.

Behaviour that would not be acceptable in a school debating society has become the norm in arguably the most important debating chamber in the land.

The House of Commons has got so raucous in recent months that Speaker John Bercow was moved to warn MPs in November that he was receiving “bucketloads” of complaints from the public about their “low-grade, down-market and unnecessary” misbehaviour.

This quotation is from 2013 and despite the best(?) efforts of at least two party leaders little seems to have changed. If Speaker Bercow can unilaterally decide that ties are no longer required to be worn, then what’s stopping him making a rather more significant decision to clamp down on boorish behaviour? Parliament should not be a raucous side-show and a few well-timed remonstrations accompanied by threats of expulsion and/or refusing to accept questions from the relevant MP and/or closing the session would surely make a difference? If the party whips really want to ‘enforce’ the views of their leaders and create a more ordered Parliament then how about them enforcing better behaviour – they are quite happy to reward loyalty or toadying and to punish disloyalty, so perhaps punishing simple bad behaviour might also work.

But of cause, all of this requires MPs as a whole to actually want to improve!