Labour MP's harassment

The wisdom here is awesome. Who would have known an MP holds his surgery for all in his constituency , he/she listens to all regardless of how they voted , one learns so much here.

Thanks, bags.

"he represents the voters of his area" and also the non-voters! They live there too.

And how the hell would he know how any of his constituents had voted? The ballot papers are not used to paper his office so that he can check on each visitor or letter. Once he is an MP, he represents the voters of his area. Full stop.

To think otherwise is to show a very narrow view of the democratic parliamentary system.

If one of those Tories came to his office with concerns over something which had nothing whatsoever to do with pushing buttons, would he tell him to go to get lost? If that (possible) Tory voter were being victimised by neighbours for being black or Muslim, would he tell him "Tough" and kick him out of the door?

Oh Corbyn is such a saint isn't he? Five hours in his office listening to problems, perhaps he will be canonised in the future like Mother Theresa?

Canvassing.

One day last week Corbyn spent five hours in his constituency office listening to people's problems. It was the day of his hundred days, and he was late for a HuffPost interview.
Do you think he should represent those tories who want him to push the button if he ever becomes PM?

Bags, how does your MP know you do not vote for him? Do you actually tell him? If so, why?

If he is a good MP, then everyone is guaranteed a fair hearing and a considered response, not just a parroted repeat of the party line.

That is right. The political leanings of his constituents are only a part of what the MP reflects. He also has to consider the general needs of the area and the problems of individuals and groups.

Even though an MP is supposed to represent all the constituents, you can hardly expect him or her to represent the 70% that cannot be bothered to take part in the election. A labour MP will have been voted for by more labour constituents, and therefore should represent their values and ideals more than those of a tory bent. Those who do not vote should not be surprised if their MP does not represent their views.

He or she should represent all his constituents; however, he will not necessarily be representing their political views in Parliament. The 70% who may not have voted can't grumble about whichever political party their MP belongs to. The ones who voted for another party candidate just have to hope that their political party will do better next time!

However, if they go to him with a problem or an issue then he should be doing his best for them whatever their political views (and he or she will not - or should not - ask that if a constituent goes to the surgery for help).

That shouild have read - "It may be that some of their constituents have different priorities to others and the MP has to work hard to reconcile all their needs " Without the bold the emphasis on the MP working hard to reconcile the interests of ALL his constituents is lost. I didn't say he/she would always succeed, but he should be trying very hard.

"It may be that some of their constituents have different priorities to others, and *the MP has to work hard to reconcile all their needs*"

Should Corbyn be lucky enough to become Prime Minister, he will speak to other nations as a representative of the whole country, not just those of his own party. He will have to reconcile his own priorities as a party leader with what is best for the country as a whole. It will not be easy.

You are very critical of government decisions which appear to you not to be in favour of that section of the population which you favour so surely you would also be critical of an MP who does not factor in the interests of those who did not vote for him when making his decisions?

Not all political issues are party political.

as anyone else

Why do you think people who didn'y vote for Corbyn, or any other MP, wouldn't contact him about whatever concerns them, dj? I have never had an MP that I voted for but I've often contacted my MP about issues I was concerned about. Sometimes they have contacted me in return, knowing full well that I didn't vote for them. I was still one of their constituents and thus had as much right to have my voice heard by my MP than anyone else.

Like Jeremy Corbyn, do you mean, Elegran?
He got 60+% of the vote, and therefore represents over half of those who voted.
However, there was only a 40+% turnout. Those who did not vote for him are hardly likely to turn up at his constituency office to ask him to represent them in parliament. They are much more likely to complain to their friends that their MP does not represent their views.

Should Corbyn then decide he is not doing his job properly and resign?
Like every other MP who does not represent all of his constituents. Do you not realise that you are asking the impossible?
Except of course for Blairites who are all things to all men - except in the labour party.

Two different meanings of "represent" here. One refers to an MP's constitutional duty to his constituents, the other to which section of them he happens to represent in voting on a particular issue.

My MP is a Tory , he voted to bomb Syria so he didn't represent me, it is not possible for any MP to represent all his constituency

If they don't represent all their constituents, whether they voted for them or even voted at all, then they are not doing their job. It may be that some of their constituents have different priorities to others, and the MP has to work hard to reconcile all their needs, but that does not mean that they are to be ignored as inhabitants of that area or their letters to their MP on local issues just thrown unread into the bin.

Even with a selfish motive it makes sense - an MP who works for all his constituents, of all parties or none, and has a good reputation for doing do, will stand more chance of gaining voters when he stands at the next election than someone who only looks after his own.

Even though an MP is supposed to represent all the constituents, you can hardly expect him or her to represent the 70% that cannot be bothered to take part in the election

But that's the point. You can expect them to. Everyone has the right to be represented by an MP, just as everyone has the right to approach their parish vicar for help, even if they're not practising members of the Church of England.
My MP happens to be a (very hardworking) Tory. He is very approachable and I am sure doesn't ask whether people actually voted for him before helping them, or replying to their emails.
And before you ask, yes, there are some non-Tory voters in the Hexham constituency.

And again, no one can stand as a labour MP unless selected by party members, so if any blairites leave the party they cannot stand as labour MP's

Even though an MP is supposed to represent all the constituents, you can hardly expect him or her to represent the 70% that cannot be bothered to take part in the election. A labour MP will have been voted for by more labour constituents, and therefore should represent their values and ideals more than those of a tory bent. Those who do not vote should not be surprised if their MP does not represent their views.

If people have voted for them as Labour ( or whatever) candidates, they may not want them if they've changed parties? And although they're members of one party they representate the whole constituency. People vote for the individual as well as the party, some more for one than the other!

And MP's are selected by the party members to stand as candidates representing the party. This is my point, they cannot leave the party and still be labour MP's . Two Tories defected to UKIP before the last election, one failed to be returned to the house.

And we apparently need reminding jane. Every so often the members of the parliamentary parties lose sight of the fact.