Also in the Telegraph letters page is this from Graham Stringer MP.

SIR – I agree with Graham Brady MP ("Liberate MPs from their party shackles", Comment, March 8) that MPs should wrest control of the business in the House of Commons from the Government.

I look forward to Graham Brady, who is chairman of the 1922 Committee, putting forward his ideas in a concrete form with all-party support to be voted on in the House.

Two issues illustrate this perfectly. A large majority of the public think that Sir David Nicholson, having presided over a health service that has allowed more than 1,200 patients to die needlessly, should be held responsible and sacked. Every backbench MP I have spoken to from across the political spectrum agrees. Health ministers and their shadows, for reasons that are opaque to me, disagree. They should not be allowed to stop a vote in the House of Commons that would show the electorate that they and their representatives are at one on this issue.

The absence of this vote leads to public cynicism. There is agreement between the front benchers on an energy policy that is going to be unnecessarily expensive for the consumer and place the security of supply at risk. I disagree with the policy and applied to go on the committee to give detailed scrutiny to this Bill. For the first time in 16 years, I was denied a place without explanation by my whips' office.

The public will be more than cynical if the lights go out after energy bills have increased and it is evident that critical appraisal that could have averted this catastrophe had been stifled.

Stringer's letter seems to give a real insight into what goes on at Westminster. Men and women of integrity are sidelined and preventing from standing up for what is right. In their place we get the corrupt, the sycophants and the placemen. You can see this effect across the policy spectrum, not least in the climate and energy field.

The letter also resonated with me because of the biofuels committee I reported on last week. Having watched the video of the debate, I had wondered at the persistence of the government minister in proceeding with biofuels subsidies when everyone - those in the committee as well as people outside like environmentalists - thought that it was a sheer madness.

What is driving the madness? The EU? Corruption? Both?

Answers in the comments.