Proceeding contribution from Russell Brown (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 10 June 2009. It occurred during Opposition day on Dissolution of Parliament.
Dissolution of Parliament
I accept, to a certain extent, what the hon. Gentleman is saying, but let me go back to the point made by the hon. Member for Moray (Angus Robertson) in opening the debate. There is a clear indication that at the moment people are fixated—justifiably so—on the allowances and the expenditure that falls into the hands of elected Members, and on the way in which some people have abused that. I have committed things to writing in the past on allowances, and I have said things. In the past couple of months, I have voted in a certain way. Never in my wildest imagination did I recognise what was going on. I defy anyone to stand up and say, "Well, I knew that that was going on." I do not think that the majority of this House did. What the hon. Member for Leeds, North-West (Greg Mulholland) says makes sense. I do not fear for myself, because there was life before this House and there will be life after it, but I do fear that we will sweep away far too many good and decent people. We have a judgment to make. Do we tolerate for another few months those who might have abused the system, or do we run the risk of sweeping away honest, decent people who deserve to come back here to build on the strengths that we have put in place? May I quote a few words? They are""to serve our country—that is all we ask."" Those were the words used by the late John Smith some 15 years ago in a speech he made the evening before, tragically, he passed away. Members—and I would include myself—would do well on occasion to remember why we are in this House. We are here to represent people. We are not here to save our political skins or our necks. We are here to do a job. I fear the results of the hostility towards each and every one of us, which I witnessed during the European election campaign. I witnessed people who would normally support my party saying on polling day that they were not coming out. It was their chance to protest. We all saw what happened last Thursday. Dissolution would mean an election, and an election is about policies and manifestos. We would be asking people to vote when they were angry, and not really aware of what any party was proposing. Some might say that it is time for change, and we have heard that often enough. It was time for change back in 1997, when my party brought forward a manifesto containing pledges on a national minimum wage, devolved Government, the new deal, cutting class sizes and NHS investment. People who wanted change could get behind that manifesto. The people who have led today's debate said that it was time for change two years ago, but I do not believe that they expected to be able to form a minority Administration in Scotland after that election. The Scottish National party's manifesto contained a number of pledges, but it is important that people who lay out their stall in that way stick to what they propose. The pledge to introduce a local income tax failed. Up to now at least, the pledge on the Scottish futures trust has also failed, and there have been failures on class sizes, probationary teachers and student debt.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 493 c890-1
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Allowances Devolution Elections Expenditure Dissolution Members Parliament Scotland Reform Wales
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 11:57:14 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_565441
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_565441
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_565441