What are our MPs good for? (From The Northern Echo)

What are our MPs good for?

2:36pm Thursday 2nd February 2012 in Rob Merrick By Rob Merrick

IT is fast becoming Westminster’s dirty little secret: the tawdry way that controversial legislation is waved through by MPs, with little or no scrutiny.

Time after time, on Bill after Bill, difficult decisions are ducked by the people we elect to represent us and passed down the gilded corridor for the House of Lords to worry about.

It happened with the Health Bill, when peers were given the hospital pass of making the best of that debacle, and again over the crucial issue of legal aid cuts.

Then the Government was defeated no fewer than seven times in the Lords over the Welfare Reform Bill, including on measures that aroused little interest on the green benches.

I should make clear that, in condemning this trend, I am not criticising individual MPs, or falling into that lazy trap of branding them lazy. Most of us would not work their hours.

No, it is the party leaders who are happy to “leave it to the Lords”, because it serves their narrow interests to avoid high-profile bust-ups in the Commons.

So, David Cameron and Nick Clegg guillotined scores of attempted amendments on the Health Bill, with the vague promise that it would be “improved in the Lords”.

There are many tales of Lib Dem MPs being told there is no need to rock the boat, because Shirley Williams, and other oldstagers down the corridor, have it all in hand.

On welfare, the key Lords flashpoint was over the “benefits cap” which Labour failed to even push to a vote in the Commons, preferring to keep its head down.

It was left to Church of England bishops to force a parliamentary, and public, debate and, whatever your view of the policy, at least force the Government to defend its case.

I would not mind so much if the Commons chamber was busy, but it’s like the Marie Celeste in there most days. Before last night, MPs had gone nearly two months without legislation to consider.

Since October, MPs have survived largely on a diet of single-issue motions up for debate, spending only 14 of 54 sitting days scrutinising Bills.

Ironically, it is often said that MPs have become more powerful, epitomised by the day that mighty Rupert Murdoch was hauled in for his humiliation.

Only this week, it was the threat that MPs would vote against an eye-watering bonus for RBS boss Stephen Hester that forced him to hand it back.

But it’s not enough to grab the headlines.

MPs must also perform the less glamorous role of properly examining vital law changes and not hand that job to the holy, the handpicked and the hereditaries.

Durham Tees Valley Airport

THE focus on up-for-sale Durham Tees Valley Airport has triggered a friendly spat between two North-East MPs over what it should be called and over which of them can claim it as their own.

Consider the words of Phil Wilson (Lab, Sedgefield): “Durham Tees Valley airport is in my constituency and has part of its runway in the Stockton North and Stockton South constituencies.”

Then compare with those of James Wharton (Con, Stockton South): “My constituency is served by Teesside Airport, which covers three constituencies: Sedgefield, Stockton North and my constituency of Stockton South.”

Settle it with an arm wrestle, lads.