How to correct their ways

Our electoral system is good but not working properly due to greed of people sitting there in parliament. They are not discharging their duties properly.

The MPs are there in parliament to see to it that the constituency they represent its due share and what they made promises of to fulfill their requirements.

I know every promise they made is neither possible to take a shape nor possible but what should be the reason that most of the MPs forget to come back to the place they were elected from.

They even try to avoid meeting people who wish to approach them on certain issues. They only make sugar coated promises and mere talks while in house, they have no serious concern about the real problems. They have so many other issues to talk about rather than looking in to problems of commoners.

People have expectations from MPs for development and even personal issues. People in fact contact them and they help them many times this may be even out of way but that is always for some consideration, they make some thing out of it cash or in kind. No politician ever denies any thing even if he cannot. I don’t see a reason how they come back elected by same voters as MP despite doing nothing for the same people who send them to house time and again expecting for a better outcome every time. What stops them choosing better persons that they cannot select with right working ability? 

The MPs in many places are always involved in various agitations. They even quarreled with various departments for wrong reasons and about wrong consumer problems for personal gains. Many times, people are wrong and they even steal electricity, use public facilities for their personal benefits still the MPs favor them because the people they choose to favor are moneyed and influential.

If nothing shacked you so far but this really beats the lot. It is a survey about the House of Commons facilities. Last year the Members’ Survey of Services’ survey resulted into a 86 per cent  of MPs voted for being “satisfied” with their office lay out. However, the MPs were most dissatisfied with the rising prices in their bars and restaurant. These bars and restaurants are heavily subsidised and guess — by the taxpayers.

In another report from one of their own MPs it was stated that they apparently drink so heavily that when they come back to the Chamber of Commons a high number of them don’t know what they voting for. That is really a disgrace. They should be glad they were in such a privilege position, voted in by their own people.

in 2009 when scandlous fiddles were discovered in their expenses they complained bitterly about the cutting out fiddles.

The Taxpayers Alliance campaign manager Robert Oxley stated that the MPs get more than enough money from the taxpayers for salary and expenses.

The next survey which will be carried out next months will cost again £27,790 yet nobody will stand up and say stop this waste of money. 

Addressing the House of Commons in April, Cameron has said to shadow chief secretary to the treasury, Angela Eagle, “calm down, dear.” He also said Tory MP Nadine Dorries was “frustrated”.

These remarks were branded as sexist and caused an uproar. Sensing the mood of the women MPs who condemned his remarks, Cameron has apologized. “I obviously said some things in the House of Commons that just came out wrong and caused wrong impression and I deeply regret that,” the Prime Minister said.

“This is not an excuse, it’s an explanation,” he told the BBC.

“It’s not what I’m like, that’s not who I am,” he added. He has also acknowledged that he must do better.

Labor party’s deputy leader and former minister Harriet Harman said earlier that Cameron’s response showed a “patronizing and outdated attitude to women.”

We arranged for the meeting the day before but on the actual day, he forgot and rushed down to the location in 20 minutes even though he was on the other side of town. He could have easilu recheduled but he did not. He was extremely apologetic about it.

Ordinary People (yet Famous)

He came clad in a blue pair of jeans and blue shirt. He was pretty casual. I thought he’d come in business outfit. He would like any ordinary person on the street. Being a member of the opposition, he was not as prominent as some other members due to lower publicity by the media. I’m quite surprised that he chose a public place like McDonald’s to meet. At the same time I was nudged by the fact that he was indeed someone famous as a passerby waved to him. He smiled and waved back.

Business

He has a business in the eduction industry and has a great passion to influence the lives of the young and mould them to be culturally correct citizens. I had a chance to see him in action during one of the cultural camps he organized for a local school and he is very passionate about what he does. In fact, he is very down-to-earth. He told me that he can’t change the world, but if he could touch one life, it’s good enough for him. That’s why he chose the education industry. He said that he could have chosen a more lucrative business.

Building Credibility

I told him that there were times when I was looking for freelance trainer position in the educational line but has not found one which clicked with me. He advised to build my credibility. He reflected upon his own situation. Fresh from getting a master’s degree, he could not find a job. He really wanted to he a lecturer but no doors opened for him due to the lack of experience. So he told one company that he was prepared to be paid minimum $1500 salary to work full-time. During that time, he was helming several education modules for the company and paid him $2000 per month. After about a year, his experience opened more doors for him.

Humble Nature

There so much to learn from a humble person like him. At first sight, you might think that he is an ordinary person but this guy is making changes to the way we live in parliament and on the ground in his own constituency. He is very easy-going and able to strike simple conversation with me. We talked about a lot of things – the greying society, family and strategies to improve on his programmes. And before long the conversation came to a close after an hour is up. He had to go back to where he came from and I had to run appointments. We parted ways on a good note and the feeling of meeting someone influential and important stayed with me thoughout the day.

But we the ordinary people are forced to watch that nightmare. Instead of questioning the politicians about why such and such issue was not taken up for discussion, or was this issue more important than the other issue, media merely focuses on some utterances.

I see some ray of hope now with Anna Hazareji and his team mates. So I would like to suggest that we should have an agenda for every day meeting. Priority needs to be decided by us and not the speaker. There should be a change in the way Indian parliamentary proceedings are conducted. There should be no reference to another person’s remark. Anybody trying to address any remark specifically should be fined heavily and that should be added to tax kitty. Any Member of Parliament absenting himself or herself for whatever reason needs to pay a fine which should not be less than the cost of the proceedings divided by the number of Parliamentary members. Such funds can be used as adhoc funds for helping flood, earthquake, or other calamities victims. If ministers resent this, it would be obvious that they do not love their subjects and so the next time they would either attend the session, or pay the fine with a smiling face. Such penalties should be applicable even if the minister chooses to be absent for half an hour.

When we take up an employment, we are expected to swipe our cards while checking in. If the ministers are being paid for what they are doing why shouldnt they be expected to be there in the Parliamentary chambers in time, and throughout the session. Parties would also not need to raise monies from any industrailist for portraying their parties as the do gooders. Such political funds are also a type of bribe, isn’t it?

Any prolonged discussions refering to past actions other than necessary statistics needs to be curtailed. Therefore, each topic needs to be given only a specific time. Only one member of one party should be allowed some time on it. Any interjection should be fined. Any attempt to stop the person from completing his statement should be fined. Any attempt to extend the speech beyond the time allocated should also be penalized. Each speaker may only be allowed 15 minutes to make their points. They should only be focusing upon why a particular action is worth taking, and why it should not be taken. Members are expected to arrive in the Parliament prepared to take decision, which may at the most vary based on opinions expressed by the others. They should do their homework. All parties should share information about why they want a resolution passed, and why they dont just like it happens in Companies Act. There is dissension there as well. But everybody receives the complete report. So why not share the content?

There are many such things that need to be done to bring our country on track Anna ji. As you rightly pointed out, it is just a beginning. We’ve miles to go before we sleep.

When approaching the site the user sees the two selected randomly pictures of parliamentarians. He offered to make a choice by clicking on one of the photos, depending on with whom of the candidates he would prefer to have sex. A comparison can be conducted in three formats – between two men, between the two women and a mixed discharge.

At the time of writing the news leader among women is a Labour Luciana Berger (Luciana Berger), and among men – Tory Johnson, Joseph (Joseph Johnson). In the mixed discharge leads Berger.

Creator of the site, according to The Daily Telegraph, is Francis Bull (Francis Boulle), formerly the British public on the television show Made In Chelsea.

In fact, the site is a local version of Sexymp.co.uk FaceMash (the forerunner of social networking site Facebook), in which the user is asked to compare which of the two girls in the photo “hot” (hotter). FaceMash project was launched by Mark Zuckerberg and his Harvard classmates for fun, but within hours became popular among students. However, the university administration did not appreciate the idea of ​​Zuckerberg – especially the fact that the founders hacked FaceMash faculty data base with photos of students – and closed the site.

Kisauni Member of Parliament (MP) Ali Hassan Joho has called upon the Government to open the Kongowea market by Monday morning threatening to re-open it himself by evening if the government is reluctant.

Speaking at the market while inspecting the market after it was closed for major clean up to avert the spread of Cholera, Joho said that move has affected livelihood of the traders and adversely affect their businesses.

‘’I welcome the government plan to keep the market clean to the required standards but it must be known that it is the livelihood of thousands of Kenyans’’, said Joho. “This market is important to Mombasa residents and its environs; it must be open as soon as possible”, He said.

Joho also assured the traders that plans of making the market to operate 24 hours system are on pipeline with funding from Constituency Development Funds Kitty (CDF).

Traders also accused the government of closing the market without proper notice as required by law.

We use the “First past the post system” and have done since 1882, and it seems to have served us well, the only party’s that wanted change were the ones who never got elected.

During the last election the government had to form a collation with one of these parties and part of the deal was to hold this referendum. The choice is, to keep the current system or to change to AVS (Alternative voting system)

With the system we have now, you vote who you would like to represent you in parliament, by voting for just one candidate, after counting, the candidate with the most votes wins, this is the “First past the post” system.

With AVS you the voter have many votes you must then put in order of preference who you want to represent you, If a candidate receives a majority of first-preference votes (more people put them as number one than all the rest combined), then they are elected.

If no candidate gains a majority on first preferences, then the second-preference votes of the candidate who finished last on the first count are redistributed. This process is repeated until someone gets over 50 per cent.

So in fact you could be voting in somebody you don’t really want. At the moment only three countries use the AVS to vote for their governments, these are

1. Australian House of Representatives
2. The national parliament of Papua New Guinea
3. And the Fijian House of Representatives

I quote:-“ AVS breaks the principle of one person one vote, because supporters of fringe parties end up having their vote counted several times while supporters of mainstream parties only have their vote counted once. Under AV the candidate that comes in third place can end up winning. People have a right to know where their vote goes. Voters themselves should decide who the best candidate is, not the voting system.”

Again I quote:- Only three countries use the complicated system – Australia, Fiji and Papua New Guinea – and Australia has compulsory voting to make sure people turn up. AV would also be expensive, requiring councils to spend more time and money on vote counting, which would increase your council tax. AV is a big change, so you need to make sure that you have read the small print before voting on 5 May.

The question you will be asked is this.

At present, the UK uses the first past the Post system to elect MPs to the House of Commons. Should the alternative vote system be used instead?

According to the member of parliament  from the affected constituency( Kisauni) Hassan Joho, the coast police boss Aggrey Adoli  together with his junior officers have failed in ensuring that there is enough security in the area.

“We are tired of burying people and paying hospital bills eveready for people  who are victims of crime” the local Mp said

The Mp added that he has discussed the matter with the police boss  several times but no actions have beeen taken and that he is not going to have any discussions with police boss  over the same issue any more.

Joho futher said that he once discussed the matter with the prime minister and the prime minister had to petition the police commissioner over the issue.

“ I personally had a discussion with the prime minister in his office about the increasing number of crimes in my constituency and the prime minister petitioned the police commissioner and wanted some answers as to why there is an increase  number of crimes in my area.” He said

The member of parliament has given the police boss an altimatum of 12 days to resign or else he is going to mobilize his constituents to demonstrate and demand that the police boss vacates his office.    

Apparently a member of parliament by the name of Gidion Mbuvi came to parliament wearing white studs earrings and sunglasses. This member is new to parliament but in his short stunt as a member he has been involved in a lot of controversy for one to wonder whether he will survive his full term.

The amusing part for this writer is the imagination of the look of the other older members of parliament on seeing him with earrings. The Kenyan parliament is composed of a conservative bunch representing a generally conservative country.

Granted traditionally men from certain tribes in Africa adorned themselves with jewelry but this was a cultural thing and worn in a masculine way leaving them to still look masculine and different from the women. The Western version of men wearing earrings and braiding their hairs, with respect, makes them look effeminate and lost or displaced.

Perhaps it was with this eyes that the other members of parliament looked at Mr. Mbuvi with.  Apparently parliament business was stopped for twenty minutes to discuss the members dressing. One of the members said that “it was wrong for a man to copy the dressing of a woman”. According to this member “In the history of this world, since God created this earth, men have never imitated women”.

The interesting thing is that Mr. Mbuvi’s justification for being dressed the way he was, was that he was young and his dressing represented the youth in the country. Granted sometimes Kenyan youth has copied what they see black American artist wearing on TV not understanding the culture behind such dressing. But for a leader to affirm this copycat business is offensive.

In any event such copying will normally only happen in the big cities because the rural areas will generally stick to traditional values.  In fact the Assistant minister for youth affairs raised this issue and cautioned of the need to ensure that both ‘rural and urban youth’ are taken into account when discussing youth matters in the House.

One member was so irritated that he asked the speaker to throw Mr. Mbuvi out of parliament because by allowing it could send the wrong message to the youth. He was of the opinion that Mr. Mbuvi’s dressing “would make students go to class tomorrow wearing those things”.

The irritation here is that Mbuvi had crossed the line of his masculinity by dressing like a woman. One member of parliament said that “I can’t come here in a skirt, but a woman can. For a man to wear earrings, it means something is not good, it points to bad manners,”.

This writer could not stop laughing while reading the article. Just thinking about the whole scenario and even why this young member of parliament did it leaves the imagination begging for more. Perhaps his intention was to irritate the older folks or to just amuse himself. Whatever the reason it sure is not parliament’s behavior.

The speaker did rule that the member was inappropriately dressed after which he “cheekily” removed the studs and the sunglasses. For your information male dress code according to the Speaker’s rules is “Long trouser, jacket (coat), tie, long-sleeved shirt, socks, closed shoes.”