MP's who Resign now standing Independents

If they do form a party I wonder if they can simply become known as something like Chuka Umuna / Independent Party ?

As the Procedure stands in Parliament at the moment I guess that's all they have to do.

It doesn't sit well with me and I have no doubt does not sit well with their constituents either.

If they do become a party there will have to be bi elections.

If I respected my MP and he/she left the party for the reasons Luciana Berger left I would support him/her as an independent but not if he/she joined another party. Couldn’t support an MP who crossed the floor, Labour to Tory or Tory to Labour

Anniebach

I am not sure there would ' have to be ' By-Elections that's been my point.

I don't trust any of them so I won't be voting for as long as I've got breath in my body.
They're not fit to run a nursery let alone a country.

Really POGS ? Come to think of it I can’t recall a bi election when an MP crossed the floor.

Trying to recall the events when the ‘gang of four’ left the Labour Party , they formed the SDP in 1981 , yes the next election was 1983

Re Fiona Onasanya .

I followed up something I read and looked at Hansard today.

Bercow made this announcement:-

" I have a brief announcement to make. I have received a letter this afternoon from the Registrar of Criminal Appeals informing me that Fiona Onasanya’s application for leave to appeal against her conviction has been refused. This notification triggers the provisions of the Recall of MPs Act 2015, and I will accordingly be writing to the relevant petition officer to inform that person that Fiona Onasanya is therefore subject to a recall petition process. It will be for that officer to make the arrangements for the petition. I am sure the House will understand that I will not take points of order on what I have just said, which I think is clear, and I thank the House for its courtesy in listening to that announcement."
----

Good.

Thank you POGS can this only be done if the MP is guilty of serious wrongdoing or for any reason ?

Shame we can’t get rid of peers who break the law

Anniebach

I found this :-

Summary of the Recall of MPs Act 2015

The Bill provides for a recall petition to be triggered if a Member is sentenced to a prison term or is suspended from the House for at least 21 sitting days. If either occurred, the Speaker would give notice to a petition officer, who in turn would give notice to parliamentary electors in the constituency.

A petition would then be open for signing for eight weeks. If at the end of that period at least 10 per cent of eligible electors had signed the petition, the seat would be declared vacant and a by-election would follow. The Member who was recalled could stand in the by-election.

The Bill also introduces rules on the conduct of the recall petition, including campaign spending limits for those supporting and opposing recalling the Member.
--

But meanwhile any member of the H of L regardless of why or for how long they were in prison, can return there and carry on with their full role in enacting legislation - ain’t democracy wonderful?

maryeliza

You make a valid point and that comes back to my point
the Procedures in Parliament are in need of reform.

Thank you POGS I think 10% of voters is fair. If Frank Field was suspended I would want him judged by voters not only by local party members

In the uk under our present electoral system a person standing for Parliament stand in a constituency in their own full name and can state the party nominating them and responsible for fulfilling the legal and financial obligations, under what is known as First past the post election, (FPTP )

First under FPTP, voting takes place in single-member constituencies. Voters put a cross in a box next to their chosen known candidate, and the named candidate who gathers the most votes in the constituency or other electoral is elected. The disadvantage of FPTP is it is a minority's choice - an MP can get elected with only 30% of that constituency in favour of him/her. In principle you are voting for an individual, not necessary a political Party. This means that 70% of the constituency did not want that candidate or party of their choice as their MP.. It actually means votes literally don't count, - up to 70% of the votes cast could be wasted because the constituent desired to support a political party, but their vote could not be accumulated in support of a party, rather than a named candidate. Whereas Proportional Representation (PR) is an electoral system in which parties gain seats in direct proportion to the number of votes they receive.

Currently in Britain we don’t have PR, and instead have a “first past the post” system: by which a party wins an election by achieving a simple mean where the winning candidate applies for the Whip of that Party. Simply in law you are voting for a named candidate to become your constituency MP not a political party even though that candidate has accepted nomination as that party’s named candidate. PR is the preferred system used by majority of democratic countries, but rejected in the past by The main two political parties because FPTP favours a two party system.
w

As I understand it, a PR form of electoral system would be required to vote for party candidates.
If the political party’s want an MP to stand down if they resign from a political party, then it could only be achieved and enforced in law under a PR system where the MP is in office virtually an nomination from the party allocated that seat in Parliament. If we desire to get away from the 2 party bickering and extremists internal pressures, perhaps the time is right to adopt PR system most popular in the rest of the world.

MarthaBeck

Not sure of your point ?

Whether the system of voting is First Past The Post or Proportional Representation if an MP either ' Resigns the Whip ' or ' Resigns from the Party ' and continues to sit as an Independent MP the Parliamentary ' Procedure ' remains the same if the ' Procedure ' is not changed.

Or am I missing something in your post?

I think *MarthaBeck is correct.

Brexit has broken British politics. Britain’s parties are unwieldy coalitions, forced together by a broken voting system.

www.electoral-reform.org.uk/

POGs my point is simply under our electoral laws it is the named candidate that is elected NOT a Party seat.
Millions cast their vote for the candidate rather than Party.
I would have liked PR so I could support the greens, unfortunately they did not have a candidate where I live. Therefore I voted for a person who I thought would be a good MP not the party she represented.

MarthaBeck

"POGs my point is simply under our electoral laws it is the named candidate that is elected NOT a Party seat. "
----

The voter should indeed vote for the best candidate but the candidates DO represent a Political Party unless they declare as ' INDEPENDENT '.

If voters use their vote to support a candidate from a political party then that is also acceptable, their choice.

If an MP ' Resigns the Whip ' or ' Resigns from the Party '
and sits as an INDEPENDENT if a by - election were called then if as you believe the constituency voted I initially for the ' candidate ' not ' the party ' then he / she will win again.

The Procedure for ' recall ' of MP's is what it is irrespective of whether or not we have a first past the post or proportional representation voting system , ' unless it is changed '.

If we had a properly democratic PR voting system then voters would chose a party but under our under tragic FPTP system people vote for an individual candidate.

Our FPTP system - no.idea where tragic came from but perhaps my gizmo knows more than I do.

FPTP got the Libs into No 10 with the Tories ,

PR would be far more democratic

varian Tue 12-Mar-19 20:36:02

"If we had a properly democratic PR voting system then voters would chose a party but under our under tragic FPTP system people vote for an individual candidate."

-----

Your theory is peculiar.

Those 19 MP's who are now sitting as Independents no longer represent the political parties they were voted in as MP's for do they!!!

Whether the system of voting is First Past The Post or Proportional Representation if an MP either ' Resigns the Whip ' or ' Resigns from the Party ' and continues to sit as an Independent MP the Parliamentary ' Procedure ' remains the same if the ' Procedure ' is not changed.

It is NOT a question of how / why individual constituents vote . Unless a candidate stands as an Independent whether PR or FPTP the candidate will stand on a Political Party ticket. If they then become an ' INDEPENDENT ' MP mid term they are no longer representing what their constituents had voted for.

In our parliamentary elections h nder our FPTP system people vote for a named candidate. Although most belong to a political party, their vote is personal. There is no obligation for an MP who leaves their party to resign.

On the other hand our MEPs are elected by a PR system where voters chose a party and the party provides a list of candidates. If an MEP resigns from his party he should resign. This applies to Nigel Garage who was elected from the UKIP list but has now left UKIP and so is morally obliged to resign his seat , but surprise surprise he hasn't done as he has no understanding of morality or democracy.

Farage, not garage

varian

'Although most belong to a political party, their vote is personal. There is no obligation for an MP who leaves their party to resign.'
----

They stand on a party ticket unless they stand as an INDEPENDENT.!!!!!

I agree if there is no obligation on an MP to resign who leaves their party.

That is the point of the thread and the question being asked.

Should MP' s who did not stand as INDEPENDENT candidate but stood on a political party ticket have a right not to be obliged to resign as an MP if they ' Resign from the Party' whose ticket they stood on or they ' Resign the Whip'. or should ' Procedure' be changed that makes a by-election necessary.

Who should hold the trump card? The MP that changed alliegence or the constituents?