http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11837538 With the advent of the Internet you can safely say that people as a whole now communicate vastly differently, ideologies are no longer confined to individuals perceptions and the occasional political debate in the nearest pub. (Everyone's has the capacity to be a philanthropist while drunk, admittedly it's often when brawls start, but enough of alcohol consumption.) People now have the capacity to communicate and reason what is best for them while keeping a watchful eye on those that were initially given the job to coordinate such efforts prior to the absence of networking. It can therefore safely be said that Politicians and Politics in general is behind the times and comments by peers like the one quote only strengthens that fact. The Political system in the UK needs more than just a couple of changes that were initially promised, the whole system needs to be completely overturned and new system imposed, a system that isn't flawed by the foundations of the old. (Which is what would occur in the case of a revamped retrofitted system) Politicians in essence aren't as necessary as they once were, in the days of old these people would be wealthy estate owners that everybody surrounding their estate would know of and know about, the modern day political system involves having "random" people that nobody knows anything about apart from the promises of policies or a future of change. This current political system is flawed for this fact because most Voters will only vote on those they can trust, if they don't know who a person is then they are not going to vote for a stranger. This can be applied to any vote over the past 15 years, anyone that has stood to be elected has only been done so as the majority are only apathetic because they don't know these people from adam and usually only re-vote for who was in previously because they are familiar with them. The Party system itself is also outdated, there are a lot of people out there with some very clever ideas and methods that could be utilised, but because they don't have the backing of a party we are left with a system of bureaucratic decadence in reverence to how a country should function. When parties taking opposition in policies, throw diatribe at one another or collude to manipulate a monopoly, it's done so with sheer disdain towards the public that they supposedly represent. It's obvious that a shake up is long past due this is further exaggerated by an economy that's bombed, but the students protesting and any number of events that will take place after this post has been published(Which are completely coincidental). I'd therefore suggest if such a shake up was to emerge the following should be considered: Scrap the party system Politicians should no longer be voted for, Policies should instead The title Politician will become as mundane as any other job position (i.e. Toilet Attendant) Those that consider the Job of Politician will "Volunteer" their services, this means they would not be paid for their role. (However they could claim the minimum a person requires to live on from the local Employment office along with the posed "riff-raff" or have a secondary job) Scholars, Scientists and Students alike would play a more Technocratic role. A Policy debate system would be required prior the voting period. Where the new found politicians and Technocrat's will not just debate a policy but actually place down hard facts or fully blown forecasts in an attempt to educate the people as to what this new policy entails. (Such debates would be television, through radio, through the internet in the form of social networking sites, blogs and forums.) This list is by no means complete and there will of course be room for additions from anyone else, but that's the exact point about the future of politics, it's up to us(all of us), not "Them"(A hierarchal few). So what additions would you add?, or what observations of the posed changes can you make?
godfrey bloom got kicked out of the eu parlliament for calling someone a fascist. that's all i know about that. love, ___________
I can't really see that working - at least 2 of the 3 main parties today originally formed through loose alliances of like-minded individuals or grouped together according to the groups who put them into power - i.e Tories (conservative) supporting landowners and Whigs (liberals) supporting the merchant classes. Break up the current parties and the same alliances would still be there. I'd agree with that in general terms. Over the last 10 - 15 years or so the two main parties have become pretty much indistinguishable from each other - with Labour heading to the right and the Cons moving toward the left - meeting somewhere around the centre-right - the old left vs right arguments of whether we should keep our public sector have been more or less settled - for example any party who made any serious strides towards dismantling the NHS would find themselves permanently unelectable - the discussion now is more about how best we manage and maintain our public services and not whether or not they should exist. The problem is that people make decisions on an emotional level - not a rational level - essentially people buy people - so I can't really see how it would be possible to separate people from policy. Absolutely NOT! I would much rather see dedicated career politicians who are well rewarded for the job than a situation where a politician is vulnerable to corruption, or in a conflict of interest between their job / business and what is best for their country / constituents. A better solution would be to pay politicians commensurate to any other leadership position within business, but at the same time they would be required to relinquish all shares, jobs, directorships, and assets other than straight cash in the bank or property - any investments they own would be transferred into special government bonds that would give a return on investment that would directly reflect the prosperity of the country during their tenure. Furthermore after leaving office they would be barred from taking any other job or setting up in business for 5 years. Can't disagree with this one - we are lucky in the uk that we don't really suffer from the horrendous brain numbing blight that our american cousins suffered from in the Bush years - the "Faith-Based Initiative" - but I'd still like to see more issues dealt with on a rational rather than emotional level (drug laws for example). Overall we could do with a shake-up of the system though. Electoral reform and the replacement of the house of lords with an elected upper house would be a good start.
Thats all very well for the politicians, but have you seen the voters? They'd rather watch the Jungle.
You tend to neglect that the current system is by no means absent of corruption or scandals, the main problem is that the "hierarchy" imposed on people that are seemingly beneath them leads them to believe that they are above the law (heck they make the law) and this is proven time and time again with rush ill thought policies and ridiculous spending sprees on folly or cuts made where they should not have been etc. Placing a politician as being a "common person", is basically tying in with the Evolution that governments initially started from Autonomies (An evolution where greater numbers of people have a greater say, as opposed to self-serving inner circle groups.) Where by every man, no matter colour, creed or background at least has a certain amount of equality. (Man in this instance refers to mankind, so doesn't leave out women) Who would elect an upper house? If we kept politicians would it be them? or the public?
