Are MPs having their lives invaded upon?
The fact that most of their lives are tracked – their speeches in parliament are posted on the internet and they are often followed by the ever hungry press, suggests that this may be the case.
I mean, most of this blog is based on what I can scramble together from the Internet.
To worsen the matter, even aspects which you could consider ‘social’ or ‘personal’ matters, of the MPs lives are being exposed in the Register of Members' Interests
Reading entries into this makes me feel as if I am spying on McNulty.
As he logs his movement, it’s like your travelling in his back pocket.
For example, on the 5th June 2007, McNulty wrote in the Register of Members' Interests: ‘I received travel, tickets and hospitality for the FA Cup Final in Cardiff in May 2006; tickets and hospitality for the FA Cup semi-final in Birmingham in April 2006, and occasional hospitality and tickets at Upton Park for home games, all as a guest of West Ham United Football Club. (Registered 13 May 2006)’
Thankfully he doesn’t give the exact dates within the months specified, or else I would feel like a stalker-beyond-a-stalker.
Does he not sound like a prisoner as he seems to declare his life to a mere Register?
You can gather from the information posted that McNulty may be a West Ham football club fan.
The Register is apparently not intended to be an indicator of a Member's personal wealth. While it may not indicate McNulty’s personal wealth, the word personal should be given special focus.
To what extent should McNulty be accessible?
Should aspects of his personal life not be kept separate from his working life?
Apparently not.
The compulsory Register of Members' Interests was established in 1974, voted for by the House of Commons.
Please note the word compulsory- it was enforced, so poor McNulty probably has little say in the matter.
MPs are required to declare in the register the sources of any extra income or gifts which they receive so that there can be no suspicion that their behaviour in Parliament is unduly influenced by outside interests.
The purpose of the Register is to encourage transparency. It is "to provide information of any pecuniary interest or other material benefit which a Member receives which might reasonably be thought by others to influence his or her actions, speeches or votes in Parliament, or actions taken in the capacity of a Member of Parliament" (Code of Conduct and Guide to the Rules relating to the Conduct of Members, HC (2005-06) 351, paragraph 9.)
The fact that most of their lives are tracked – their speeches in parliament are posted on the internet and they are often followed by the ever hungry press, suggests that this may be the case.
I mean, most of this blog is based on what I can scramble together from the Internet.
To worsen the matter, even aspects which you could consider ‘social’ or ‘personal’ matters, of the MPs lives are being exposed in the Register of Members' Interests
Reading entries into this makes me feel as if I am spying on McNulty.
As he logs his movement, it’s like your travelling in his back pocket.
For example, on the 5th June 2007, McNulty wrote in the Register of Members' Interests: ‘I received travel, tickets and hospitality for the FA Cup Final in Cardiff in May 2006; tickets and hospitality for the FA Cup semi-final in Birmingham in April 2006, and occasional hospitality and tickets at Upton Park for home games, all as a guest of West Ham United Football Club. (Registered 13 May 2006)’
Thankfully he doesn’t give the exact dates within the months specified, or else I would feel like a stalker-beyond-a-stalker.
Does he not sound like a prisoner as he seems to declare his life to a mere Register?
You can gather from the information posted that McNulty may be a West Ham football club fan.
The Register is apparently not intended to be an indicator of a Member's personal wealth. While it may not indicate McNulty’s personal wealth, the word personal should be given special focus.
To what extent should McNulty be accessible?
Should aspects of his personal life not be kept separate from his working life?
Apparently not.
The compulsory Register of Members' Interests was established in 1974, voted for by the House of Commons.
Please note the word compulsory- it was enforced, so poor McNulty probably has little say in the matter.
MPs are required to declare in the register the sources of any extra income or gifts which they receive so that there can be no suspicion that their behaviour in Parliament is unduly influenced by outside interests.
The purpose of the Register is to encourage transparency. It is "to provide information of any pecuniary interest or other material benefit which a Member receives which might reasonably be thought by others to influence his or her actions, speeches or votes in Parliament, or actions taken in the capacity of a Member of Parliament" (Code of Conduct and Guide to the Rules relating to the Conduct of Members, HC (2005-06) 351, paragraph 9.)
'Entries made in the Register aim to give a clear description of the nature and scope of the interests declared. Subject to the Rules, however, each Member is responsible for the content and style of his or her own entry' – a sign of a wee bit of freedom then?
On a general level, McNulty, according to theyworkforyou.com, voted very strongly against a transparent parliament. Would you not feel like prey if you were McNulty?
The register is published annually and is available for public inspection.
I guess you could argue that seeing as its been around for so long, it’s the status quo, and wont be changed. But then again, is it fair?
No comments:
Post a Comment