People with integrity.
People in direct contact and one of the 'general public'.
At present we have a top down system which I suggest is failing because there is a mass of individuals who don't believe their leaders are acting on their own behalf, leaders they don't trust. People who in fact may well have the best interests of their mates at heart rather than Joe Bloggs - who they have little knowledge of.
They have the best interests of the country as their motivation but that country is not the one that the majority identify with.
6 comments:
I suggest there is not one person living that everyone would agree as THE perfect politician. And what is THIS COUNTRY that EVERYONE would identify with?
1: Are MPs asked to pay more for less. Regards to their government pension.
2: Are those that are left expected to take up the slack from those that are made redundant. So they are already doing more for less.
3: This government is hard on crime. Please tell me why only a few members were prosecuted and even fewer went to prison. Over fiddling expensive.
4: We seen to follow American on all things. So why not have MPs only allowed three terms in parliament.
5: How do you divide 1 mill jobs by 2 mill unemployed and get every one employed?
6: Why not have one pension scheme for all. Control by the government and stop private insurance company's from running them. All profit could go into the scheme. To help those that can not pay do to circumstances.
China that is what the foisted creep Camoreon is sucking up to.
On the contrary, may I suggest that everyone, when they stop and think about it, would prefer to have people of integity.
There is no country that everyone will identify with, however there is one that the majority will. It is one that they believe is fair.
Get people to stop and think and define what is fair and we're much closer to a unified approach. The problem is that very few will do the above which is a bottom up approach. They prefer to criticise what is handed down to them as 'fairness' which is a top down procedure.
Too many people want others to solve the worlds problems for them - so that there are many con-artists who capture the media and pursuade a large section of the public - not to think things out for themselves - but rather that they have the answers with a leave-it-to-me-and-I'll-solve-the-problems with slogans like "Vote For Change".
Given personalities at the top with self belief like Thatcher, Blair and now Cameron we give a sigh of relief and pass the leadership to them only to find after a while that they really haven't a clue and we'd have been better sorting things out for ourselves.
If we encouraged debate at the grass roots we'd get people to come to a consensus at the bottom and find people from this group to lead us.
The next thing required would be to persuade these people at the bottom to give up their satisfying careers which enable them and their families to enjoy life, to become a politician. That is to pay them a worthwhile wage.
What is it we say - pay peanuts - get monkeys. This applies to politicians.
How many sane people want to become one?
No wonder that we get some strange people running for office. If they are bright - they find ways of milking the system to earn money in ways that weren't intended.
The system that we're very proud of and call "democracy"needs a total rethink - we're getting there - but we've a long way still to go.
I'm hoping that the unrest we're heading for will get people rethinking the whole system and encourage more self belief at the grass roots where people ask "Do we really need the kind of politician being offered - can't we do better infact, without them and do the job ourselves ?".
I suggest you will never get a consensus over what is FAIR.
Even now with the teachers striking over what they consider to be lack of fairness, there are those many workers who would jump at the chance to get the same conditions offered to them.
There are also some people in work taking home pay less than some neighbours get in benefits. There are young people and families in need of affordable housing while some really big earners occupy homes not meant for the better-off. But they would claim it to be fair. And the list could go on. We tend to see fairness in our own terms.
You will always get some people who work far harder than others and also those who do the minimum but expect the maximum. During my time as a teacher it was blatantly obvious. Same with my experience in industry (although those working on piece rates got exactly what they earned together with agreed bonuses which all received) and in other areas where I have worked.
Is it fair that some people are born more intelligent than others, or born to much wealthier parents? It is impossible to have an equalisation system that makes all people equal — other than in the law. (And even that can be questioned)
Yet people from lowly backgrounds often, through sheer hard work and/or luck, do advance in life. Is that fair? Of course it is.
Whoever you vote for, once in power, reality sets in and there has to be adjustments to one's thinking. Ideas of fairness may well have to be much broader than expected. A bigger picture has to be considered, including our position in the EU and the world as a whole.
If Geoff thinks he can do better as regards a fairer society he must take up the challenge and run for Parliament, or at least the local or County Council.
I love this one.
JAK
Post a Comment