The following news items caught my eye today:
- Theresa May moves to cap the remuneration of Special Advisors (Spads;) except for ‘special’ cases;
- The Honours System is in need of reform;
- Journalists should stop asking politicians stupid questions.
- The Batley & Spen by-election will not be contested.
In none of the above do the electorate, who have a financial stake in all of them, have any voice whatsoever.
Why do politicians need ‘advisors’? Should said politicians not be masters of the brief they hold; and if they are not, why have they been appointed?
Why should politicians be able to reward, at the public largesse, those who have supported them in their endeavours?
Why should not journalists ask politicians stupid questions; after all politicians are stupid people, are they not? On the other hand Journalists are stupid people too if all they can think to ask are stupid questions.
By what right do the political class decide to disenfranchise one section of the electorate by limiting how many candidates can stand where?
Are people not generally better persuaded by the reasons which they have themselves discovered than by those which have come into the mind of politicians?
If our politicians are to be persuasive they must be believable; to be believable they must be creditable; and to be credible they must be truthful. Needless to say, they fail on all three counts – so why do we continue to elect them and then pay them a salary?
Had The Harrogate Agenda been ‘mainstream’ by now public opinion would no doubt have reached uproar at this point – the blame that it has not can only be levied at those who are now in control of THA – and no apologies for that assertion will be forthcoming from me.