Do we really want what we say we want from politicians?
There was a wonderful quote a few weeks ago about what voters say they want from politicians and what they really want, and it concerned immigration: the quote was We demand that our politicians serve us a dish of fried snowballs and then feign disappointment when they fail to deliver it.
I can't accept that journalist's conclusion - that politicians will never please the public so they should stop trying - but I do think he had a point that what people think they want is sometimes incoherent and contradictory.
We say we want local choice and local democracy, but the instant it happens you can bet your last penny someone will start shouting "postcode lottery!"
We say we want politicians to be independent-minded rather than party puppets, but voters always penalise parties which are seen to be divided and the press always presents leaders who cannot get their policies through as weak and indecisive.
We say we want politicians to give us clear, straight answers to straight questions but all too often when they do the media start shouting "gaffe!"
My quote of the day this morning came from an excellent piece in the Guardian by David Mitchell called Cameron gives us a tiny glimpse of normality and we shoot him down.
He adds, "The reaction to the prime minister’s third-term declaration is a good illustration of what’s wrong with British politics at the moment."
Mind you, as I have previously noted, the objection to DC giving a straight answer to a straight question did not come from ordinary voters: it came from journalists (with the exception of John Rentoul and David Mitchell himself) and from politicians.
This is the last time I will write about this subject, but I think the one additional comment which David Mitchell could have made is that it may indicate how out of touch the political and journalistic establishment is with the rest of the country.
And by the way, we need consultant-led maternity services at West Cumberland Hospital: #SupportOption1.
I can't accept that journalist's conclusion - that politicians will never please the public so they should stop trying - but I do think he had a point that what people think they want is sometimes incoherent and contradictory.
We say we want local choice and local democracy, but the instant it happens you can bet your last penny someone will start shouting "postcode lottery!"
We say we want politicians to be independent-minded rather than party puppets, but voters always penalise parties which are seen to be divided and the press always presents leaders who cannot get their policies through as weak and indecisive.
We say we want politicians to give us clear, straight answers to straight questions but all too often when they do the media start shouting "gaffe!"
My quote of the day this morning came from an excellent piece in the Guardian by David Mitchell called Cameron gives us a tiny glimpse of normality and we shoot him down.
He adds, "The reaction to the prime minister’s third-term declaration is a good illustration of what’s wrong with British politics at the moment."
Mind you, as I have previously noted, the objection to DC giving a straight answer to a straight question did not come from ordinary voters: it came from journalists (with the exception of John Rentoul and David Mitchell himself) and from politicians.
This is the last time I will write about this subject, but I think the one additional comment which David Mitchell could have made is that it may indicate how out of touch the political and journalistic establishment is with the rest of the country.
And by the way, we need consultant-led maternity services at West Cumberland Hospital: #SupportOption1.
Comments
"By raising the 40% tax rate we can raise unemployment benefit. we can only pay for a tax cut by lowering unemployment benefit."
Next Monday you stand outside the offices at Albion Square, and I will stand outside the Jobcentre. we can both ask the first 100 people we meet the following question.
should we raise or lower the 40% tax rate, if it directly affects unemployment benefit?
we will quickly learn that "people" think we should both raise and lower the 40% tax rate at the same time, whilst we simultaneously raise and cut unemployment benefit.
there is the key, is it really what people think they want that is contradictory, or is it what politicians think people think they think they want?
the only way really to find out what people think about something is to hold a referendum on it. sure you will get the odd person who will shout "postcode lottery" but then again, you never can please everyone.
at least the people making the decision are the ones who are on the hook if it turns out to be a bad decision.
as for DC giving straight answers well, I quite like the approach, and hope he keeps it up and more politicians can learn to do it.
the media dont like it as it limits what they can report on. but the media can't solve the problem with politics because well:
"The reaction to the prime minister’s third-term declaration is a good illustration of what’s wrong with British politics at the moment."
as we can see, the media can't figure out what the problem is.
sorry was not sure if i had mentioned that bit before :D
anyway, even with a system in place such as the changes proposed by the six demands there will always be someone shouting
"Oh but I can not force everyone else to do what I want them to do, even if it against the very nature of their being, so its an unfair society"
sadly you will always get those types of people, but on the whole, democracy (as I understand it, that is direct democracy) works.