You are reporting the following comment to the PledgeBank team:
Only attending 55% of votes does sound a bit low, but that could be for very valid and well known reasons to do with the way Parliament works.
I made my first commment because I thought you were being a bit unfair on Kate Hoey; on the plus side she has "spoken in 11 debates in this Parliament — 94th out of 645 MPs" and "asked 55 written questions in this Parliament — 53rd out of 645 MPs."
I suspected, perhaps unfairly, that this pledge was directed more against the CA than Kate Hoey.
I don't know how an MP is supposed to vote according to the views of all of their 60,000+ constituents. Should they have daily referendums, what about those in the constituency who disagree with the majority? Who would be their MP under such a system? That is the truly dictatorial system: the "dictatorship of the majority."
I hope you didn't accuse me of being spineless Dave; that would have been rude, and unnecessary, as I wasn't rude to you. As you can probably guess from the third paragraph of my first comment, I support the right of people to live their lives as they and their consciences see fit, as long as they don't hurt others and as long as what they do (in an animal welfare context) is not demonstrably unnecessary. People like me have often been targeted by those who disagree with our beliefs, therefore I don't give my full name. Besides your accusation is feeble Dave; how do any of us know what the real names of other contributors are? Not that that should matter anyway, surely on here what a person says is more important than what his name happens to be.
I don't think it's reasonable to expect an MP to do nothing other than work for their constituents; that would make them a slave, not a representative. I do believe they have a right, and a duty to pursue activities and interests outside of constituency work - that should make them better as individuals, more rounded and more aware of the world around them and therefore better MPs.PT, 12 years ago.