Wednesday, 18 February 2009

Methinks Prescott Does Protest To Much

John Prescott's campaign against banker bonuses creates an interesting parallel when you change the word "banker" for "politician" and "counter staff" for "tax payer." I of course don't mean in terms of rhyming slang.

This ideal of "no bonuses for failures" or "greed culture" really does beg the question - how can our politicians criticise, when they themselves are no better? It's like being a judge with a criminal record. So what's a 93% victory really, a token gesture to keep up appearances, but really the same old self serving dogma. As what's in the 7% loss? A job for the senior bankers advising Gordon Brown on the economy?

This is just another clear sign that politics really needs to change, but how is it to do that when it's so party focused. Would we get more of the leaders we need rather than they need, if we were able to vote on the party leader nominations? There needs to be a line drawn somewhere in the ground, but will we ever be able to get this balance with politics so closed off to us?

Perhaps the voting polls show a light at the end of the tunnel. The Lib Dems and
New Labour are drawing ever closer to one another and since New Labour has inhibited our ability to hold them to account by others means. Would it be enough of a shock wave if they were to become the third party after this election? It would need large amounts of people to tactically vote, are we that angry?

I say, go forth and multiply!

Along the lines of this subject, there's an interesting article by Simon Heffer that looks at the response to Jacqui "fiddler" Smith grabbing money like she's in the Crystal Dome.

No comments:

Post a Comment