UK MPs Day 2: Adams

[Silent Hunter]

Gerry Adams, Sinn Fein, Belfast West.

Not sure why the electors of Belfast West keep electing someone who doesn't actually do anything in Parliament.

[Јas]

Gerry Adams, Sinn Fein, Belfast West.

Not sure why the electors of Belfast West keep electing someone who doesn't actually do anything in Parliament.

First off, let me say that I'm not a SF supporter. (As far as the North is concerned I'd be a staunch SDLP guy.) However:
1997: 55.9%
2002: 66.1%
2006: 70.5%

Never mind the SF results in West Belfast in the locals or Assembly elections.

Clearly the constituents are very happy with his holding the position and actually prefer the fact that he doesn't attend parliament. I'd also suggest that there are many MP's who do considerably less for their constituents than Mr. Adams, whether or not they appear in parliament. (In fact, I'd suggest that there are many MP's who appear in parliament and are of sod all use to their constituents. Like him or not, he's efforts have helped improve the lives of a great many people in NI - and all without entering Westminster. So, I'm not remotely surprised that the people of W Belfast continue to elect him.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Say what you like about him (and I can think of a lot), but he's a good constituency M.P. And don't the Sinn Fein M.P's have Westminster offices now, or was that just a proposal?

It would be nice to see the Sinn Fein M.P's turn up in the Commons (if only for the hilarity of Adams and, say, Robinson, voting the same way on just about everything non-Northern Ireland related) but the oath/affirmation policy would have to change for that to happen.

[Јas]

Say what you like about him (and I can think of a lot), but he's a good constituency M.P.

^^^

And don't the Sinn Fein M.P's have Westminster offices now, or was that just a proposal?

IIRC, they do have the use of offices there, yes.

It would be nice to see the Sinn Fein M.P's turn up in the Commons (if only for the hilarity of Adams and, say, Robinson, voting the same way on just about everything non-Northern Ireland related) but the oath/affirmation policy would have to change for that to happen.

Even if the oath to the monarch was removed, I think the Sinn Féin position is simply that Westminster is a foreign parliament and that they have no interest in taking part in it.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Belongs in jail.

[Democratic Hawk]

Do Sinn Fein MPs draw a salary because if they do, then they jolly well shouldn't?

Dave

[Јas]

Do Sinn Fein MPs draw a salary because if they do, then they jolly well shouldn't?

Dave

They don't claim or accept a salary, but they do take certain expenses.

BBC story on NI MP expenses from last October.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

If he ran anywhere in the Republic of Ireland he would probably win.. so thanks to the Brits for creating this distraction of Sinn Fein work, effort and expenses.

[Јas]

If he ran anywhere in the Republic of Ireland he would probably win...

Well, I doubt it. I'd say that of the 43 constituencies less than half would elect him, say in the upcoming general.

[Democratic Hawk]

Do Sinn Fein MPs draw a salary because if they do, then they jolly well shouldn't?

Dave

They don't claim or accept a salary, but they do take certain expenses.

BBC story on NI MP expenses from last October.

It might be only £200,000 but Sinn Fein MPs shouldn't get a penny unless their take their oath, which they won't, and take their seats, which they won't

Dave

[Јas]

Do Sinn Fein MPs draw a salary because if they do, then they jolly well shouldn't?

Dave

They don't claim or accept a salary, but they do take certain expenses.

BBC story on NI MP expenses from last October.

It might be only £200,000 but Sinn Fein MPs shouldn't get a penny unless their take their oath, which they won't, and take their seats, which they won't

Dave

I don't want to seem impertinent but, why?

[Democratic Hawk]

Do Sinn Fein MPs draw a salary because if they do, then they jolly well shouldn't?

Dave

They don't claim or accept a salary, but they do take certain expenses.

BBC story on NI MP expenses from last October.

It might be only £200,000 but Sinn Fein MPs shouldn't get a penny unless their take their oath, which they won't, and take their seats, which they won't

Dave

I don't want to seem impertinent but, why?

Since they refuse to be fully-functioning Members of Parliament, I see no reason why taxpayers should be footing their expenses. I'm sure that taxes paid by their constituents are enough to foot the bill but that is not the point

In the United Kingdom, I consider it the duty of any MP to represent all their constituents, whether they voted for them or otherwise. While I accept that all SF members have been legitimately elected, their refusal to take the oath and take their seats effectively denies representation to their constituents, not all of whom oppose the Union

Indeed, with the exception of Gerry Adams in Belfast West (elected, in 2005, with 70.5% of the vote), voters of Mid Ulster, Newry and Armagh, Tyrone West, and Fermanagh and South Tyrone, voted for candidates opposed to Sinn Fein's abstentionist policy

Dave

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Since they refuse to be fully-functioning Members of Parliament, I see no reason why taxpayers should be footing their expenses. I'm sure that taxes paid by their constituents are enough to foot the bill but that is not the point

Being nice to the Shinners means that people don't get blown up anymore. And o/c historically most UUP M.P's were anything but fully-functioning.

[Democratic Hawk]

Since they refuse to be fully-functioning Members of Parliament, I see no reason why taxpayers should be footing their expenses. I'm sure that taxes paid by their constituents are enough to foot the bill but that is not the point

Being nice to the Shinners means that people don't get blown up anymore.

True enough, even if there has been too much accomodation on the part of Britain and the unionists

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Did any ever refuse to take the oath and take their seats?

Dave

[Јas]

Since they refuse to be fully-functioning Members of Parliament, I see no reason why taxpayers should be footing their expenses. I'm sure that taxes paid by their constituents are enough to foot the bill but that is not the point

In the United Kingdom, I consider it the duty of any MP to represent all their constituents, whether they voted for them or otherwise. While I accept that all SF members have been legitimately elected, their refusal to take the oath and take their seats effectively denies representation to their constituents, not all of whom oppose the Union

Stepping wholeheartedly into the role of devil's advocate...

What exactly does a 'fully-functioning' MP do that the SF MP's don't do, that makes their salaries/expenses worthwhile?

Is the failure to take up seats in Westminster denying representation to their constituents not really more of a theoretical denial of representation (considering that no NI party is going to form part of the UK government and their votes are nearly never likely to make any significant impact)?
Is it relevant that on constituency matters the SF MP's may prove as capable as their counterparts and that they are quite capable of making whatever representations to the powers that be as are necessary without taking their seats?

Indeed, with the exception of Gerry Adams in Belfast West (elected, in 2005, with 70.5% of the vote), voters of Mid Ulster, Newry and Armagh, Tyrone West, and Fermanagh and South Tyrone, voted for candidates opposed to Sinn Fein's abstentionist policy

Dave

A fair point, but this is simply how the FPTP electoral system operates.
I'm sure there are many constituencies in Britain where a majority of voters disagree with the winning candidate over some very significant policy issue (Iraq, for example). That's simply how Britain's democracy works.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Did any ever refuse to take the oath and take their seats?

No, they just took the oath and hardly ever bothered to turn up. And if they did turn up they hardly ever spoke.

[Democratic Hawk]

Since they refuse to be fully-functioning Members of Parliament, I see no reason why taxpayers should be footing their expenses. I'm sure that taxes paid by their constituents are enough to foot the bill but that is not the point

In the United Kingdom, I consider it the duty of any MP to represent all their constituents, whether they voted for them or otherwise. While I accept that all SF members have been legitimately elected, their refusal to take the oath and take their seats effectively denies representation to their constituents, not all of whom oppose the Union

Stepping wholeheartedly into the role of devil's advocate...

What exactly does a 'fully-functioning' MP do that the SF MP's don't do, that makes their salaries/expenses worthwhile?

Well, all MPs with the exception of Sinn Fein take their seats and don't practice abstentionism. I'm sure Scottish Nationalists want an independent Scotland but they play within the rules

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's a denial of representation only as so far as they refuse to take their seats. MPs represent their constituents, whether they are part of the UK government are not

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Maybe, but that is not the point I'm trying to make

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A fair point, but this is simply how the FPTP electoral system operates.
I'm sure there are many constituencies in Britain where a majority of voters disagree with the winning candidate over some very significant policy issue (Iraq, for example). That's simply how Britain's democracy works. [/quote]

I don't dispute that but, at least, they would represent their constituents within parliament as well as outside it

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

Did any ever refuse to take the oath and take their seats?

No, they just took the oath and hardly ever bothered to turn up. And if they did turn up they hardly ever spoke.

Lazy bums, if you want my honest opinion

Dave

[Јas]

What I'm interested in getting at is your attitude on actually taking the seat in parliament.

You use the term 'representation' quite a bit in this regard, but I'm not clear about what exactly you mean by the term and specifically what benefits would acrue to the citizenry of West Belfast et al by virtue of this missing representation that they aren't getting otherwise.