WHY is a debate even needed for a vote of confidence/no-confidence to be taken in Parliament for/against the sitting prime minister?

At the end of the day, after all the hot air has been released and perhaps some un-parliamentary words have been thrown across the floor, the MP’s will just move across the floor to whichever side they want to be.

So why make such a simple thing so difficult? Why must there be a debate at all whether the prime minister enjoys the confidence, or otherwise, of the House?

It is not as if the MPs have not decided yet and need to hear all the good and bad things about the prime minister before they could make up their minds on supporting or not supporting him.

Is there anything wrong for the MP’s to physically enter the House and straightaway take their seats on whichever side they are – for or against the prime minister.  Thus when the prime minister enters, he can at a glance see whether he has majority support or not and proceed as appropriate.

After all, there is no fencing or barrier in the House separating the two sides which the MPs would have to jump over!

So, please get real and practical – the MPs would be entering the House with pre-decided loyalties. Why must such a simple thing be mired in technicalities and procedures?

Stop running around the mulberry bush and go straight to the heart of the matter – the sitting places of the MPs.

MPs should exert their right to sit where they want to sit and not allow the executive to dictate to them. – October 16, 2020.

* Ravinder Singh reads The Malaysian Insight.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.