I never thought I'd be grateful to The Daily Telegraph! But here we are in the midst of a political revolution in the House of Commons, the ethical questions about expenses and about the ability of the House to keep its expenses rather private, instead of opening them up to public scrutiny, has opened up the whole discussion about representation in a democracy. I suspect that part of the anger about claiming for cleaning a moat, or for refurbishing a London flat and ordering two massive televisions systems for different homes by 'flipping' homes as easily as one might flip between channels on the televisions themselves, is that most people just cannot identify with that lifestyle. I don't pay thousands of pounds for gardening, or cleaning, nor do I have a moat around my country house - so how can those people really represent my interests in Parliament?

The House of Commons should reflect the concerns and interests of ordinary people. Good constituency MPs do that through their surgeries and through keeping their ear very much to the ground. In order that all that good work is not to be overlooked in a wave of cynicism, it is important that the system of parliamentary democracy should be above reproach.

That implies both fair remuneration for MPs, so that you do not have to have to be wealthy in order to qualify, and a genuine use of the House of Commons as a debating chamber that can make a difference to legislation - not an inconvenience to the operating of the executive.

Let's hope the present crisis brings about some fundamental re-thinking of how we operate a representative democracy in a way that is genuinely representative of the people, and done in a way that is fully transparent - both in terms of remuneration and expenses, but also in terms of the way in which legislation is presented and debated in Parliament.

Mel Thompson, May 2009

 

 

For those who are (or who are thinking about) taking a course in Politics, or taking a Political Philosophy module within a Philosophy Course, there are a good range of books to develop ideas outlined in the Teach Yourself book. Here are some suggestion...

 

To those coming new to political philosophy, there are some good general introductions. David Miller's very short introduction is readable and a good way of stimulating interest, while Wolff and Kymlicka are rather more substantial as student texts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Two other useful books for students are Adam Swift's Contemporary Political Philosophy, and Michael White's Political Philosophy: an historical introduction.

 

Most books on political philosophy head straight into the fundamental concepts, but my preference is for getting a good historical perspective first. Hence I find the Michael White introduction particularly useful.

 

With all introductions to a subject, however, you get the attempt at a balanced view and a broad overview - that's what they are for. But for me, it is the classic texts that give the best feeling for how philosophers throughout the centuries have tackled political issues. Here you find polemic as well as balanced reason - thinkers who are keen to make a point and address an issue of the day. Like Marx, they wanted to change the world as much as comment on it. Here are some of my personal favourites...

 

But where do you start with these?  My choice would be to read either Mill's On Liberty, or Machiavelli's The Prince. They are utterly different from one another, yet both deal with issues that are absolutely central to an enquiring approach to politics. Machiavelli is generally portrayed as cynical and as supporting the idea of a ruler who is quite without moral sensitivity. That's not really fair. What he is doing is looking at what is required of a ruler if the defence and integrity of a state is to be his (he wouldn't have considered a 'her' at that time) primary aim. This is wry questioning of the real world of power politics - removed from our own by the centuries that have intervened, but relevant for all that.

On Liberty sets the liberal agenda, from that great utilitarian and campaigner for freedom and for the rights of women.