Under a fairly new law, constituents can sack their MP and trigger a by-election. They need 10% of the electorate to make this happen.
Voters in Ian Paisley’s seat are now being invited to visit community centres and sign for his removal.
It seems sightly futile. Thousands sign a petition, the election is re-run, and the same person will nearly always get re-elected (unless it is a rare marginal seat).
Democracy is seen to be done, but nothing changes, except a vast hit on local expenditure for no gain.
Seems wide open to abuse to me. It's not too hard for extremists to get a grip on 10% of a constituency and trigger targeted re-elections. Not sure that would be a good thing.
It doesn't do anything to actually solve the key threats to functioning democracy in the UK- which are corruption and deficit of representation.
Maybe it would deter said extremists from beginning a petition if they were made to pay, say, 25% of the total cost of another election if the MP is re-elected. Their intended disruption wouldn't come cheap.
"It states that MPs who are convicted of a criminal offence and jailed, convicted of providing false information on allowance claims or barred from the House of Commons for 10 sitting days or longer can lose their seat if there is a successful petition to recall them."
Criteria seems rather restricted anyway. 40% just dissatisfied with the representative should be an option.
Since local expenditure is involved can't see constituents triggering an election gratuitously.
PP,
Of the 650 seats in Parliament, only about 100 change parties at election time. So over 500 seats keep with the incumbant party, and MP. Even in landslide elections such as 1997, 505 seats were unchanged.
So the chances are about 5-1 that a recalled MP will be in a safe seat and be re-elected.
//Maybe it would deter said extremists from beginning a petition if they were made to pay, say, 25% of the total cost of another election if the MP is re-elected.//
It might, but then it just seems pointless to effectively restrict this privilege to people who can afford to run 25% of an election campaign. Not terribly democratic.
The solution is to have fairer elections in general, this is a pointless measure that will almost certainly get pounced on by well-organised extremists.
// So the chances are about 5-1 that a recalled MP will be in a safe seat and be re-elected.//
yeah got the bit about 500 are in safe seats .....
BUT - all things being equal - - - - and they arent.
and I am afraid tha the chances of a recalled MP will be in a safe seat is NOT true because basically we have nt had enough of them to make an estimate.
"oh well we dont have data on X so I will use the data on Y instead"
may lead to - - - error
It’s a particularly daft idea in this constituency with an MP who’s name alone divides opinion. But who will get reelected if he stands as a DUP candidate virtually automatically.
Many other places even safe seats it would be different but I’m not sure I like the idea of dedicated minorities banding together like that: it’s the reason I’m not keen on these ‘petitions’ for this and that
PP,
Ian Paisley Jr has a majority of 20,643. He is unlikely to lose all those, especially in Antrim where the vote is cut down sectarian lines. Twenty thousand DUP voters aren’t going to vote Sinn Fein.
"It states that MPs who are convicted of a criminal offence and jailed, convicted of providing false information on allowance claims or barred from the House of Commons for 10 sitting days or longer can lose their seat if there is a successful petition to recall them."
- OG
Say, what? They should be out on their keisters immediately, never mind a petition.