In every democracy, parliament is a forum of controversy, with the opposition in an eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation with the government. The greater the confrontation, the more rigid is the discipline exercised by the respective party machines over members of parliament.
As parliament is now approaching the run-in to the next general election, which may come sooner rather than later, back-bench MPs will strive for greater visibility.
Mavericks?
Discipline sometimes takes the semblance of regimentation. Nevertheless, there usually are, in every parliament, a number of independent-minded members, or mavericks, who are willing to challenge the views of their leaders and colleagues in public, not minding that such action will probably reduce or eliminate their chances of office. Sometimes, they may have already run out of their chances.
When vital divisions are held, such members will normally be found voting for their party. But their willingness to voice unorthodox or embarrassing opinions contributes much to the vitality and range of parliamentary debate.
On most occasions they electrify the media by introducing an element of the unusual or the unexpected.
These members are not the darlings of their respective party whips, but they catch the eye more easily than the run-of-the-mill back-benchers who conduct diligent research before making an occasional speech.
Pedestrians?
The ordinary back-bench MP plays a pedestrian role when he embarks on his or her parliamentary career. S/he is expected to look after the interests of constituents, taking up their grievances with the relevant ministries when this is considered appropriate.
If a back-bench MP wants to get results, a letter to the minister might suffice, but if one wants to make a row, a particular issue is raised in parliament. It is only in exceptional circumstances that an MP can win concessions what would not have been granted in any case.
A determined MP can sometimes hasten the process. Even when the answer is in the negative, it may be a consolation to the constituent that his grievance has been raised and considered in the open at the higher levels
Back-bench MPs are expected to support their respective parties in the division lobbies. It is the whips who play the role of sergeant majors and not the generals in the ministerial benches that keep order on the parade ground. It is amazing what they can do with sticks and carrots!
MPs are also expected to attend meetings of their parliamentary group and, if they have time, they may also be recruited to work in special committees of the House. These committees are useful training grounds.
Aspirants
Beyond these duties, back-bench MPs may involve themselves in debates. A few can distinguish themselves by displaying their oratorical skills, even their wit.
The more assiduous MPs would be better if they specialise in particular fields and acquire valuable know-how. This will enable them to play the role of group spokesmen or to intervene with a minimum of authority in debates relating to their “expertise”.
In their attitude to party discipline, back-bench MPs on each side of their House fall into three general categories.
There is a sizable group with earnest hopes of achieving ministerial office. These members will be, at once, punctual and assiduous in attending meetings and careful not to give the slightest hint of disloyalty or unreliability. This group can be relied upon for never giving headaches either to the whips or the party leadership.
Some notable political leaders abroad were rebellious for brief periods in the early part of their careers. Churchill, Harold Wilson, and Aneurin Bevan were difficult on their way to the top. To pursue their course called for courage and an unusual degree of self-confidence. In Malta, we have had more MPs who were difficult on the way down than on the way up. Non-conformity on the part of politicians on their way to the top is hard to come by.
There is then a second group of MPs who have no serious hope of achieving office but who fall into line by instinct, out of loyalty and conviction.
Foot soldiers
These are the foot soldiers who render yeomen’s service in the constituencies. They may be described without disrespect as essential ballast that keeps the ship on an even keel when it is lashed by gales of ideological indignation or by the storms of partisanship.
The mavericks come third. Some look at them as buccaneers. Others treat them as objects of fun. Others still, consider that the colourful views of the maverick MPs break the monotony and add spice to parliamentary debate.
I believe that it is the experienced, non-conformist backbencher with fresh, independent views who commands attention. The greenhorns are an insufferable nuisance on the rare occasions when they surface.
[email protected]