Which of the following changes, if any, to the UK’s political system would make a positive difference for you?

MaizieD

Casdon

volver

Visgir1

No one can become a MP unless they have done at least a term as a local Councillor.

I'm not sure that's true....

You’re right volver, you don’t. This made me laugh, I looked it up and there’s a ‘how to become an MP* on the government careers website. All you really need is enough people to believe you can do it and vote for you.
nationalcareers.service.gov.uk/job-profiles/mp

I read it as visgirl making a suggestion for improving the quality of MPs in the future; not stating what doesn't happens now.

Oops, sorry Visgirl, I misunderstood.

I think numbers 2 and 5 , but I agree that it’s difficult to decide.

1 & 5 for me

For me, first choice, number 1. And number 4.

Definitely not 3. As that could lead to a postcode lottery.

I remember when Gordon Brown was Prime Minister that at Questions to the Prime Minister, he was asked on several occasions a question about a contituent of an MP who had been refused some type of medicine by one of those bodies that have been now restructured, and he would say that these are local decisions made by local people. And that was it.

But, at the risk of going off-topic, may I add a 7th question please, something I consider would be of far greater benefit to people, particuarly people in big problems over housing and the like.

This is that when Parliament is dissolved for a General Election, there are no MPs for at least four weeks, sometimes more. As far as I can tell, this dates back to over four hundred years ago when Parliament only convened when the Sovereign wanted it convened.

I consider it would be better if a "Member of Parliament" were considered to be a Corporation Sole, like a Bishop is a Corporation Sole. that is, if something belongs to the Bishop of Somewhere, it does not belong to the person holding the office at the time.

So if the office holder changes at an election then the documents and case load would get handed over.

But the bigger part of my suggestion is that instead of Parliament being dissolved some weeks before the General Election, it should go into "Recess for a General Election" and then be dissolved at 11:59 pm on the day before the election. That way people would still have an MP to turn to for help.

The problem is that under the present system, if someone is being supported by an MP over something serious, like risk of losing housing or being wrongly treated by the benefit system, and a General Election is called, then the person is not an MP and is regarded as if a member of the public, so loses the power to get access to a Minister. It might be "Oh oh oh tradition et cetera but it is useless if a constituent is in a big problem and the person who was an MP no longer has that status and influence to help them even if the person who was an MP is very supportive.

I would like to know what people thibk of that idea please.

Number 1 definitely. Not number 2 because I think that the HOL tries to keep the HOC in order when reviewing bills.

I agree with your 7th in theory but I think that MPs would be spending all their time electioneering and, if they think they may lose their seat they may just throw in the towel.

Visgir1

No one can become a MP unless they have done at least a term as a local Councillor.

I am saying. No one should be a MP unless they have done a stint as a local Councillor.
I was answering the original post.

My OP asked which of the 6 suggestions you would choose. Yours was not one of them, Visgirl.

Is this, therefore, the "short suggestion you would send to the PM"? I must admit I don't think any of the current contenders would listen so I didn't bother with that but others might like to.

Number 4 for me, immediately.