• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Liberals sack MP how?

Abdul Alhazred

Philosopher
A
Joined
Sep 4, 2003
Messages
6,023
I thought I understood the British system of government, until I read the "Liberals sack MP" thread.

As I understood it, voters from each constituency choose an MP, and the MPs as a group (but in practise the party in power) choose a Prime Minister and the heads of the various departments of government, known as ministries. No?

So the party in power can "sack" one of their own from the job of running some ministry.

But how can the Liberals, a party not in power, "sack" any of their own at all? I'd think only the voters of a particular constituency could do that.

Please explain.
 
You are correct in your understanding of the British system.

The Liberal Democrat party didn't sack this woman as a member of parliament; only the electorate can do that. (She could have been thrown out of the LibDem party, but she'd remain an MP.)

She occupied what is called a "front-bench post". Most parties have, on their front benches in the House of Commons, a mirror image of the Government's front bench, i.e. the Cabinet. Basically, she was the party's official spokesperson on something-or-other (I forget what) and the person in charge of grilling the Minister of This Something Or Other That She Was The Spokesperson for. That is the post she's been sacked from.

(I think.)
 
No party can sack an MP. They only cease to be MP's when they are voted out of office at a general election, resign or die. They can of course be expelled from the party for various reasons. Such a person remains an MP and cannot be required to resign and stand for reelection, even if they defect to the opposition.

The major opposition parties do however assign the job of specialising in the affairs of various departments of state to their more promising MP's with a view to criticising the government more effectively and coming up with alternative policies. This is normally called a "shadow cabinet ". It was from such a post that the MP in question, Jenny Tonge, was sacked.
 
well all a political party can sack anyone from is something they gave them in the first place...a position, title or priviledge. Once you are elected, you stay elected unless you are removed for some disqualifying act...(criminal offence etc). You may be removed from a party, in which case you are no longer the "silly party member for wherever" you are just "the member for wherever" you have to sit on the cross benches in parliament but you still have your vote... The most powerful thing is pre-selection....ie, who gets to stand as the "silly party candidate". If the party is strong in an electorate then being that parties nominee is all that matters, a monkey on a stick would get elected, and sometimes do. Politicans who are not members of major parties very rarely get elected....sacking from a party invariably means you will be tossed out in the next election.
 
Mendor said:
You are correct in your understanding of the British system.

The Liberal Democrat party didn't sack this woman as a member of parliament; only the electorate can do that. (She could have been thrown out of the LibDem party, but she'd remain an MP.)

She occupied what is called a "front-bench post". Most parties have, on their front benches in the House of Commons, a mirror image of the Government's front bench, i.e. the Cabinet. Basically, she was the party's official spokesperson on something-or-other (I forget what) and the person in charge of grilling the Minister of This Something Or Other That She Was The Spokesperson for. That is the post she's been sacked from.

(I think.)
Click to expand...

So she was sacked from the non-existent post she would have had, but didn't have, had the Liberals been the party in power?

Of course we don't have a shadow cabinet in the USA because the executive is separate from the legislature by law.

Did I get it right?
 
Yes.

Edited to add: it may not be as meaningless as all that. People on the front benches probably draw higher salaries than backbenchers. This is definitely true of Government Ministers, but I don't know to what extent it's true of opposition parties.
 
Abdul Alhazred said:


So she was sacked from the non-existent post she would have had, but didn't have, had the Liberals been the party in power?

Of course we don't have a shadow cabinet in the USA because the executive is separate from the legislature by law.

Did I get it right?
Click to expand...

Not quite - she used to be the party's official spokesperson on something or is no longer.
 
Abdul Alhazred said:


So she was sacked from the non-existent post she would have had, but didn't have, had the Liberals been the party in power?
Click to expand...
Not really. In a parliamentary democracy, each of the main parties or groups will have an MP (or equivalent) responsible for each area of Government.

The party/group in power have people who actually run things; but the opposition parties also have a very important role. Their job is to both act as a spokesman for their party (if we were in government, we would be doing ....) and to hold the current government to account; to stop them getting away with things.

How well it works varies of course, but that's the idea and it is an important part of parliamentary democracy.
 
Abdul Alhazred said:



Of course we don't have a shadow cabinet in the USA because the executive is separate from the legislature by law.
Click to expand...

I've heard the US presidential system described as an elective monarchy. The lack of an official opposition and the inability of the legislature to cross question the elected monarch on a very regular basis seems like a definite drawback in your system to me.
 
I'm chuffed! Not only do I start a thread which runs to three pages, other people start threads to talk about it! :)

Anyway, as the others have explained (and as I eplained in my OP on that thread) she's been asked to step down from her position of children's spokesperson from Kennedy's front bench. "Liberals ask MP to step down from front bench..." struck me as unwieldy a possibly confusing for non-UK posters, so let's just say I used "sack" to sex the title up a little :)
 
shuize said:


Just like the BBC...
Click to expand...

Well actually, the BBC didn't sex things up; their claim was that the Government sexed things up, which we now know is false, except for thing about the 45-minute claim only referring to battlefield weapons, which members of the Cabinet knew, but the Prime Minister didn't. Odd, that...

Anyway, well spotted! I suspect "sexed up" is going to enter common usage over here, if it hasn't already :)
 
BillyTK said:
Anyway, well spotted! I suspect "sexed up" is going to enter common usage over here, if it hasn't already :)
Click to expand...
But you still stand by the totality of your post, right?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom