Tim Watts wrote:
> On 13/05/10 21:43, JimK wrote:
>> On 13 May, 21:37, Tim Wattsdionic.net> wrote:
>>> I'm not entirely sure weather anyone will take any notice of this, but
>>> it might be worth a browse.
>>> Part P is mentioned, but the reasoning text submitted by someone is
>>> utter bollocks. I've left a comment on the discussion page with a view
>>> to rewriting that bit.
>>> Part L isn't mentioned yet
>>> Tim Watts
>>> Hung parliament? Rather have a hanged parliament.
>> can't help thinking this is not really going anyway - some of the
>> stuff listed as "wrong" is verging on the ludicrous - Listed
>> Buildings, Firearms, Foxes?
> I suspect not. But it's source isn't some random person, it is:
> Clacton and Harwich MP Douglas Carswell, who appears to have created the
> page back last year.
> I like the principle, but the standard of comments, and as you point
> out, the issues, indicate sadly that many of the electorate aren't very
> well informed so no one will listen to them anyway.
> I think, re Part P and part L, letters to one's own MP is the better
> bet, and the more traditional way. At least in principle, he can pass
> them to the Minister responsible directly even if he can't be arsed to
> act on them himself (or even understand the issues). Let's face it - why
> would my millionaire ex banker MP care about windows - he's the last
> person who's likely to dirty his hands when he can get a "little man" in.
Because he is your elected representative, and if you say you represent
a very large on-line community, he bloody well should listen, not
because he cares personally, but because he is a bloody professional
politician, and it is his JOB to care, and you put him where he is, and
you can sack him in 5 years. Or, if he is a total arse, you can go to
his boss, and vent your spleen there, and try and get him sacked.