No idea myself.
I do know that the career to these people seems to be the all, and that is a real problem
It's actually one of the areas within the socialism sphere that appeals to me, at least theoretically, in that the idea is the politician is not a careerist who makes a fortune from being a politician.
The Americans have taken that game to a whole new level where every administration uses the offices of gov to make vast personal fortunes
I'll give an example. My local MP is a bloke called Derek Thomas in west Cornwall. It's a area that relies on farming, fishing and tourism and also has a disproportionate representation of deprivation (it was on the EU objective 1 funding scheme for years).
But Derek is a yes man for Boris. One of his loyal numbers he can count on in the voting lobbies. So far he's voted for measures against ending child poverty, for measures to reduce benefits, ending long term secure tenancies and most recently on farming and fishing he voted with the Govt to remove the amendment protecting food standards in the agriculture bill. So he's basically shafted just about all of his constituents.
Perhaps even worse than this is George Eustice, the Environment secretary, who I actually know through his sister who now owns the family farm, has not only shafted the whole rural economy of farming and fishing down here. He has been actively driving these measures.
Our council leader on the other hand, has an active real time handle on housing, farming, fishing, business, children's and adult services, health care provision, transport etc as it's his day job. So he actually understands the real issues that affect local people. He'd do a far better job in Parliament representing his constituents.

