Politicians

I am not a very political person, in that I do not get fired up about different political parties, or hate anyone who has different views to me (in fact, I don’t think I hate anyone – hatred is such a strong emotion, and usually involves deep-seated emotional feelings against someone or something, so I doubt if my feelings ever go beyond a strong dislike), but I do have a passing interest in political matters that affect me and my fellows. However I do not envy anyone is a position of government as any decision they take will upset one sector of the population (or maybe all of them!), even if the decisions have to be taken for the common good – like increases in taxation, or rates of duty.  But this is more on fiscal policy than about politicians so I have digressed.

Politicians – why do they run for office? In my opinion it should be because they wish to do something for their fellow citizens, because they believe that they can help and have the skills required to help run a country. This is called Altruism – where the reward is not financial or otherwise, but knowing that you are doing good for others. But in reality it appears that most are nothing more than self-serving egotists who want the fame and publicity that comes with the office, but in fact have no wish to help anyone but themselves. It is said, usually by the MP’s themselves, that they salary they receive is insufficient incentive to run for office, though once you add the tax-free “expenses”, including office space, secretarial services, etc. the “salary” becomes not unsubstantial, but many ex-politicians find that the addition of “former MP”  on their CV opens many doors, and bigger pay-checks once they leave office, and if they held a senior post (such as a cabinet position) this also helps command large sums of money on the “after dinner speaking” circuit.

Look at daily attendance at the House of Commons – many days there are just a handful of faces there, usually the same ones – even when quite serious business is being debated. The House only sits a limited number of days a year (around 82) so why can’t all MP’s make sure they are available all the time?  The reason is that most of the “business” is boring and they just cannot be bothered to sit through it!  I believe that when the House was first televised most MP’s attended with greater regularity as they could be seen there, but as viewing figures are low so is attendance as no-one cares.

At least with the British system we do actually have a politician as Prime Minister, as he is the leader of his political party, and that party is elected into government, unlike the US where they elect the President independently from the political party who might win the election proper. Which is why they often end up with jokers over there, like Ronald Reagan (he never knew what country he was in let alone knew what policies he was supposed to stand for), both Bush’s and Bill “zipper problem” Clinton. At least we have not stooped that low yet.