No - the mic in the UK parliament is dominated by lawyers and full time politicians.You mostly dont get successful businessmen or professionals - after all, who with the wit to become successful would want to drastically reduce their income and become hated by many and disliked by most? It isnt a rational job choice. Which is why you get a collection of oddballs and egoists.
Bit of a vicious circle really. If we had respect for politicians we might get decent ones but then if we had decent ones we might have respect for them.
But at least there is one aspect which is good in the UK. Our politicians arent bent to anything like the same degree that they are in France for example.
I can see an argument for better pay* for MPs to make them independent and to attract people who are successful in other careers who would find it hard to rejoin (unlike lawyers).
* I mean competitive and enough to remove other "allowances" and the "need" for other roles, therefore they are acting for the electorate, not shadow characters.
But at least there is one aspect which is good in the UK. Our politicians arent bent to anything like the same degree that they are in France for example.
It's true that the French system is pretty corrupt, and as they've practically all got their hands in the till, neither side seems to want to upset the applecart. Sadly the mainstream french press are pretty timid.
France needs it's moment like the MPs expenses scandal in the UK to get it all out in the open.
In the UK we have a system of lobbying. Groups with A vested interest, Idealogical aims, Politicians themselves are in an advantageous position to have contact with politicians/civil service. When we had a coalition government the following article revealed a potential issue with government (our) money being channelled to pro HS2 lobbying groups. So.....I would deduce that the government had a bias towards HS2 going ahead and is helping the pro lobbyists. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/pol...er-8783673.html
I can see an argument for better pay* for MPs to make them independent and to attract people who are successful in other careers who would find it hard to rejoin (unlike lawyers).
* I mean competitive and enough to remove other "allowances" and the "need" for other roles, therefore they are acting for the electorate, not shadow characters.
I disagree about other roles. IMO they should be part time - they make far too many laws as full timers and in any case it would help to get "real people" in the Commons. But I can never see the job being attractive to successful people - the public would never stand for pay in the millions. And then there is the contempt issue. And finally an ordinary MP is largely powerless. So can you see a successful businessman used to controlling, and directing an organisation on a multi million pay packet being interested in being part of a talking shop? Mind you if Trump is an example of a successful business man in power, do we really want it anyway?
![[Linked Image]](http://bradley.it/public_images/drive.jpg)
