But Bevan himself was reported as having real concerns about the demotivating effect that the welfare state would have on society at large. Politicians put forward the notion that if we vote for them then they will solve our problems, only they don't. Less is more when it comes to government, the complete antithesis of the EU. Sorry Pete but the current breed of politicians are part of the problem, they are not part of the solution.
How easy and tempting it is to look at someone else's work, which you don't know the first thing about, and say how piss easy their job is. Your own job, of course, is complex and demanding - an ignorant novice couldn't possible do it! A politician's task is to reconcile a myriad of conflicting and incompatible aims and priorities. However it is done, a lot of people are sure to be unhappy with the outcome, which doesn't suit their personal interests. And a lot of things happen in the world about which politicians have no power, knowledge or responsibility, but for which they invariably get the blame. That's life. Even the most competent face an impossibly difficult job, but unfortunately few of the brightest people go into politics nowadays: too much hassle, not enough money. They can find very much more lucrative and secure jobs elsewhere. Do you really think making politics even less lucrative and even more insecure is going to help? Or do you actually want a government of dimwits? In a democracy, come the next election the voters can throw the rascals out and install a different lot of rascals - who will face exactly the same problems and dilemmas as before. Journalists rarely gather readers by praising anyone, least of all politicians, or giving a balanced view; everything is a bad thing, if you read newspapers. Knockabout stuff, but don't believe everything you read. The ministers in the incoming governments of 1997 (Labour) and 2010 (Coalition) were mainly novices as ministers, but were all experienced politicans mainly with 10 years or more as MPs under their belts, and as shadow ministers. And they still had a lot to learn, by trial and error. A Parliament and government comprised entirely of novices would be making nothing but errors for quite a long time. Again, is that really what you want? For what it's worth, if you are wondering I am not a politician but I read Politics at Oxford and worked in government for 40 years. Just saying.
Pete, honestly, you are talking about the job that politicians should be doing ... but not the job they actually do. Anyone in a job for a long time learns how to "do the job" they do, but very few learn how to get things done - it's not the same thing.
Pete, nobody has said it is a piss easy job and I bow to your superior knowledge gained through study and 40 years of practical experience. However too many constituencies always return a candidate of the same flavour and often that candiate is selected by a local party cabal of a handful of people or a local trades union. They go to Westminster and what little power they have is taken by the party whips and given to the leadership to do with as they please, I just don't think it is very democratic, the will of the people is lost somewhere along the line. Sure government is complex and skilled people are required to run the country but the impression that we, the voters, get is one of where the leadership is increasingly driven by the daily news cycle and their own egos, the dividing lines between party, state, government, parliament, etc are all blurred. In my naivety I had always thought that the politicians gave political direction at a strategic level to a professional civil service to implement, I know life is more complcated than this but I am sure you get the general principle, but the whole system has been politicised and micromanagement is now the name of the game. The Empire was run by a handful of people in the age of the carrier pigeon, the main beficiaries of our modern complex system of government are the people who run it and the average person on the street succeeds despite it not because of it. So I ask again, have you read Peter Oborne's The Triumph of the Political Class and if so what is your take on it? And yes my own job is complex and demanding - an ignorant novice couldn't possibly do it, but I learnt how to do it so it can't be too hard.
Very simple proposition - to be allowed to stand as a candidate for election, you should have paid a minimum of 5 years NI contributions from a non-party environment. That would mean you have to have experienced some form of working contribution to society, be it salaried or self employed, outside of political research and indoctrination, and as such would have a better idea of the impact their decisions have on the people they are supposed to be representing. Too many politicians (of all leanings) come into politics direct from university, and have no inkling of what a society needs to make it function properly. They then work within the confines of a political party until such time as they have been trained in the derelict ways of politics and are ready to be pushed forward into candidacy, perpetuating the problems within government. There is a simple problem that many younger political firebrands really do not get - Society contains 100% of the population and not just the fraction they know/care about. A 60 year old has been 20 (and 30) and remembers the problems a 20 year old has to deal with; a 20 (or 30) year old has not been 60, yet they seem very reluctant to take into account the needs of a 60 year old!
That is all so true - although I don't necessarily think that you have to be 60 to be wise. It is quite true that the current leading lights of all the parties have spent all their careers in Westminster. None of them have tried setting up and running a small business or even working for a manufacturing company. They may be brilliant at navigating the corridors of power - not a negligible skill by any means - but how good are they at anything else? One thing is apparent: parties are no longer driven by convictions. They are driven by voter marketing. Instead of doing what they think coincides with a vision they have, they just do what they think will keep them in power. It's all arse about face.
all this reminds me of a time when I was working for a subsidiary of GE (or GEC - the American one). I was leaving there anyway, but shortly after their trading company had a rogue trader, one of their sales people was caught bribing Pentagon officials to buy Pratt & Whitney jet engines. A young corporate type come over and lectured us for half a day on ethical practices within industry. At 'any questions', I woke up and asked, why, if the US operations were using corrupt or dishonest practices, was an American lecturing us, in England, who hadn't been caught being dishonest. Obviously didn't go down too well.
I can tell you aren't a team player Jerry :wink:, you also ride motorbikes and spend far too much time on internet forums, which is further evidence of that fact.
There seems to be a simple but childish solution. How about we treat as a job? 1y before end of term we get politicians with relevent experience for X position to apply for it. They bring a detailed plan of how tjey are gone change/improve X. For example I will have more police on streets by january by hiering more officers which will cost xxxx in salary, yyyy in training, hhhh in equipment per year. They list all. Come election we do informed decision as we all have avcess to document. If we elect him he needs to sign it and if he fails with no good reason we fire him?
Was it Robert Heinlein that suggested that the best politician is one who has to be dragged kicking and screaming into office? Anyone seeking political office is automatically judged unsuitable for the job. Simplistic and unworkable, but oddly attractive as a solution, too. :smile:
the last person to enter parliament buildings with honest intentions was Guy Fawkes polititians have even corrupted celebrating that that be renaming it bon fire night and trying to phase it out with this halloween americanism
Aye - always been an advocate of using a 'jury' style of appointment for MP's, but obviously those in current control would never allow it as they would be barred from office for past corruption ....... As for whistle blowing on corrupt colleagues .... I did that once, 6 years ago, when a senior manager ordered me to send out false invoices to clients to cover shortfalls in revenue ...... I was (to use the term used by the board of directors in advice to HR) 'managed out of the business' and have been unable to get an interview, let alone a job, in the sector since (20+ years experience down the pan)...... Those I blew the whistle on, not surprisingly, are still there, so I have to assume the clients knew what was happening and were willing participants!
The Speaker of the House of Commons has to be dragged unwillingly to the chair, by an ancient tradition following a similar principle.
The current dwarf may have been dragged.........but it wasn't unwittingly.......he wanted to get on the gravy train not just as a passenger, but also as the owner/driver. AL
Tory sleaze is worse than ever: Yeo and Deben must go! – Telegraph Blogs This should be more widely known.
