How Things Ought To Be.
This essay is from a guest and pal of Oldrightie. Take careful note!
At a gathering of past and present Prime Ministers at Downing Street, Sir Anthony Eden was asked if he could think of an appropriate collective noun for those present. His reply was immediate and masterly:-
“A Lack of Principles”
What was then an extremely clever and very funny remark has become the status quo. Our greedy and often incompetent politicians (and in concert, economists, bankers and brokers) have dragged the country into an abyss of poor industrial performance, unregulated immigration, excessive taxation and long term debt ,predicted to last for the next ten years.
Our Parliamentary system lurches from Left to Right every few years, with each new incumbent blaming their predecessor for their inherited mess. Politics itself, not Government, has become a career, a cult of enlightened self-interest and more recently, shameful criminality. Now is the time to stop and reconsider our system of Government. With a few minor changes, and with very little expense, a reversal is possible which will raise political standards and recreate a once revered process of Government which can be looked on with pride.
An irrevocable law should be passed which only allows the Government to manage up to 25% of the country’s GDP.
This law should allow a run-up period of 5 years for its full implementation. Excessive taxation and incompetent squandering of resources has ruined the industrial economy. Governments don’t know how to make money, they only know how to spend it. Our welfare system is a joke, a charter for unscrupulous, work-shy and poorly educated wasters which penalises those genuinely in need of our help. If 75% of the UK economy were private, there would be a booming export trade, full employment and no debt.
Abolition of Party politics within Government.
If you need a good example of bad governance, look no further than the current Conservative / Lib Dum coalition. Formed out of desperation after years of incompetent excess by Labour, one would imagine that it would be possible to collaborate in the interests of the UK. Not a chance. Despite outward public harmony, the resulting melee is a rat’s nest of jealousy and childish bickering. Discussions about proportional representation and re-zoning of political boundaries have little or nothing to do with good governance, only with political power and how to ensure that your party is voted in at the next election. Neither are necessary.
By all means, a prospective MP could be a member of a political party – we need to understand how he or she thinks before we vote for them. But once they arrive in Parliament, they should serve the Government, not their party. How do we achieve this? Simple. We buy a lottery machine capable of holding a mix of 648 sequentially numbered balls in two groups, white and black in the ratio of the election winners to everyone else. After the election, and when an MP first arrives at Westminster, they draw a ball from the machine. If it is white, they join the Government, and if black, the Opposition. They should join Parliament as a public duty, not as a member of a political party, and use their talents accordingly.
The practice of Parliamentary Immunity should be modified.
When a person is voted onto the Board of Directors of a company, they have certain rights, responsibilities, duties and obligations – and liabilities. They (hopefully) draw a good salary commensurate with their responsibilities and experience. And if they fail to perform, they are voted out. If they fail to comply with an agreed set of standards, they are penalised.
MP’s should share the same working environment. We are asking them to act on our behalf to perform a very difficult job, for which they should be very well paid. Not the relative pittance they receive now, but CEO money, tax free, and they should earn every penny of it. To be a Member of a UK Parliament should be viewed as an honour and a privilege. We ask that they should be suitably qualified and behave honourably. If they are not up to scratch, we will vote them out. If they behave dishonourably or dishonestly, then they should be punished and demonised, and should suffer a heavy financial penalty and possible prison – not just a slap on the wrist, but a life-changing blow which rewards their poor lack of judgement and loose morals. They enter Parliament to uphold its good name, not to damage its reputation on the World stage.
Finally, we need a word to describe a Bad Parliamentarian. One which, if used, indicates absolute disgust and outright abhorrence at their actions. Inventing a new word which carries the correct linguistic approbation is not easy, and therefore I suggest that, in line with current environmental ethos, we recycle one. How about “wog”? It stands for “Westminster Old Guard”. For all of those lost souls who have cheated on their expenses, taken bribes, manipulated policy for personal gain, stabbed more honourable Members in the back, and engaged in any other form of corruption which is incompatible with the process of good government.
To be branded a wog should signal the immediate end of any public office or corporate appointment. There are many good MP’s, those genuinely motivated to work tirelessly on our behalf because they believe in Parliamentary Democracy, but who are starved by adherence to the party system and the layer of political scum which invariably floats or bullies its way towards the top
So, let’s see how many of your so-called Statesmen are prepared to support these changes, and how many will start to run up complex excuses for why the current system is better. Public Interest or Enlightened Self Interest? It’s your choice, so let’s keep score and at the next election, vote for the UK.