'The person who is elected by representing a political party has a moral obligation to obey the party’ There are many reasons as to why this is an issue, the main reason being party whips. A party whips are people or methods that by which a given party informs their MPs what position or way the party is taking or voting concerning a particular issue. A local Croydon Newspaper in September headlined, ‘Party whip or conscience?’, the article concerning the amendment in the laws regarding abortion, suggested that the general public opinion is against this statement whilst some MPs would be for this statement.
Firstly the Prime Minister in defence of this statement may say that when the particular MP was elected by his constituency the person ran representing a particular party, for example my local mp is Mike Freer and represents the conservative party. When they chose to run and represent the part they took on the moral obligation to adopt the political parties ideology the parties manifesto and its views on particular issues. Further, party whips and this moral obligation protect certain elements of democracy. Abraham Lincoln said that an essential part of democracy was that the government should be ‘by the people’. When the people vote for a particular party they vote for their manifesto. If an MP votes solely based on their own opinion not considering the party view, it undermines the manifesto that the people voted for because legislation against the particular party view may end up being passed. Some would argue that if someone is not prepared to represent a party they should, like the former MP, Richard Thomas Taylor who ran in concern of the saving of Kidderminster hospital, run as an independent MP. Then they vote however they wish.
On the other hand however, when taking into account another element of Lincolns definition, a government ‘for the people’ a government gains legitimacy or consent to rule on behalf of the citizens and people. Therefore...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document