Back on 10th September in a debate in the House of Commons, the Conservative MP for East Worthing and Shoreham, Tim Loughton stated “Is not the change in the law that we need that, rather than having to point to a single person who caused the access damage, any group .. illegally encamped should be collectively liable for fines and compensation” 

Whilst there are many people in our society who might see this as a good approach when applied to groups of people who camp in public spaces after someone has forced their way through a locked barrier, if this approach was followed through to its conclusion it would also lead to a dramatic reduction in the time taken for criminal investigations and substantially increase the numbers of people found guilty of crimes that may not have knowingly committed. In the case of groups of people who gather to protest about unfair laws and in doing so trespass on private property, the police would no longer need to identify ring leaders and organisers, as the entire group of protestors to be held responsible. Perhaps in cases where pharmaceutical companies introduce dangerous drugs such as thalidomide, that rather than one company needing to take responsibility for their poor research, that the whole of the industry would be accountable. When football supporters and other groups of people end up with fights or abusive actions the whole group of supporters would need to be held accountable, not just those who started the fights. When certain members of clubs like the Bullingdon club damage restaurants, the whole of the club and indeed possibly the whole of Oxford University could be held responsible.

Take this a bit closer to home for Tim and his chums (apart from the ex-Bullingdon club members) and what about the case of a Parliament which introduces laws that cause damage to peoples lives? The whole of Parliament would need to accept responsibility, irrespective of how individual MPs or parties voted. It would no longer be acceptable for one Party to blame another for the outcome, as they are a collective body and so would need to accept responsibility for the laws passed whilst they were members of the same Parliamentary House. In the same way the collective sense of responsibility for expenses being misappropriated would mean all MPs and Lords would need to take responsibility for the breaking of the rules by a small number of MPs and Peers. Then when it comes to payment for policies and questions asked in the House, every Party and every MP would need to be prosecuted for such matters. I wonder if Tim will remain so popular if his colleagues start to consider such examples?