Professional politicians a blessing or a curse?
Saturday, 06 February 2010 11:30

The MPs' expenses scandal rolls on, with three Labour MPs claiming parliamentary priviledge as a defence for their actions.

Let's look at the broader picture, something that Labour is not good at doing. In the past politicians were generally taken from the local worthies who became local councillors, county councillors and MPs as part of what they saw as civic responsibilities. MPs did not get expenses. Generally they could afford to do things without too much concern. Enter the egalitarian Labour movement and calls for equality, allowances, equality etc etc. It sounds fine to pay people who would otherwise be unable to afford to become MPs, but the result in the unholy mess that we have witnessed.

These people are career politicians. They are politicians to make a living, and a good living at that, as well as all the other perks that go with it. The all-expenses-paid foreign trips to 'see for themselves' etc etc.

We have too much political correctness, too many demands for more women MPs, people from ethnic minorities etc. What we actually want is the best person for the job, not for instance women or ethnic minories shoehorned into jobs to meet quotas in parliament. Looking at it another way, when you visit the doctor do you want to be seen by the best qualified and most able person, or do you want someone who is in the job to meet the quota for entrants to medical training?

Career politicians are not good for the country, the old way may have had its flaws, but the people that were MPs were not in it for the money. This lot are!

Same applies to the House of Lords. When they were not elected or appointed by the prime minister they could say and do what they liked without fear, now we have cronies who are there to serve the interests of the ruling party.

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Reddit!! Mixx! Free and Open Source Software News Google! Live! Facebook! StumbleUpon! TwitThis Joomla Free PHP