Necrosis of Politics -and reasonable manifesto

Sunday papers are done and dusted. The tawdry exploits of our politicians are exposed for all to see. Evidently adultery is condoned by His Holiness Tony Blair; the supurating sore that is our governement continues to dictate, and to preach to us about minor irrelevancies; yet takes a laissez-fair approach to moral issues and concepts that should be treasured as the backbone of society. Hence we find "family" is broadly irrelevant, as is marriage; while cannabis is "ok", homosexuality is actively promoted, and everyone has "rights", but no one seems to have "responsibilities". I am of the opinion that there is no morality left in politics. (Or was I just naive in believing there ever was some).

If our government are meant to be leaders (and not just our employees) should they not show some traits of leadership? Should you not be able to trust them, to look up to them, to think of them as role models for our children?

Is it not time we saw some morality.

Reading the newspapers and watching the TV News I must conclude that much of the British electorate has lost its faith in government as a whole, and politicians in general. We are currently suffering under the most self-serving, arrogant, venal, duplicitous and cynical government that has led this country in the 34 years I have been voting. Despite this, and to our despair, the polls show it is likely that they will serve another term.

Premise: The population does not believe in their politicians.
Result: The electorate sees little differentiation, and is disinclined to vote. This means that we are rapidly becoming less democratic.

I think that the electorate deserves better, but this means a strategic rethinking of the way in which politics is conducted. Any change must be observed as being genuine, not tactical, and therefore should be considered as a long-term strategy.
Problem: How do we restore the faith of the electorate?
I put forward the following hypotheses for consideration.

• Voters would support a party that demonstrates transparency of policies. No spin just reasoned argument laying out the alternatives considered, the assumptions made, and the justification for the chosen policy.



• Voters would support a party that recognises, acknowledges and supports good policies, ideas, and proposals, even when espoused by other parties.
  It is the duty of the opposition to test and debate the policies of government. However, I can think of nothing more refreshing than hearing a politician agree with his or her opposite number, and whilst articulating some of the alternatives that could be considered, agree that on balance they will support the position.



• Voters would support a party that started from scratch, and reconsidered the way in which UK plc operates.
  Each new government builds on the financial regime of its predecessor. This does not necessarily mean that it is right. Should we not reconsider, and ask ourselves “Is the nation financially sustainable - where does it generate revenue?” Can that revenue support our requirements and aspirations? Who is responsible for generating the revenue? The shortfall between that revenue and our requirements and aspirations must be bridged by taxation.



• Voters would support a party that can articulate and debate the nation’s strategic direction, and how their tactical decisions fit against that strategy. (It would be interesting to hear a Chancellor explain how buying votes fits a strategic vision for the nation, or how stealing £5B from our pensions funds helps the nation).



• Voters would support a party that can show clear prioritisation of its policies. (I like the acronym MoSCoW - Must have, Should have, Could have, and Would like to have).



• Voters would support a party that conducts itself according to clear ethical and moral principles.



• Voters would support a party that allowed logic to triumph over dogma.



• Voters would support a party that admitted when it is wrong and admitted when a U-turn is a U-turn.



• Voters would support a party that raises the bar of party politics beyond the cult of self and party to the cult of service and nation.



• Voters would support a party that applied performance related pay policies to itself. I accept this may be difficult, but there must be metrics that can be measured, e.g. number of attendances in the House, number of constituency surgeries, number of constituents seen, percentage of those constituents who receive follow-up… etc.



• Voters would support a party that is subject to the same rules of taxation, as they are. (E.G. Ministerial cars should be taxed as perquisites, ministers should have to claim their travel expenses… etc.)



• Voters would support a government where the MPs pensions were linked directly to the average of those paid in FTSE 100, and were subject to the same maket forces.

This raises a huge number of side issues:

• Media support - they would see any such change as cynical unless it was sustained and shown as the new face of the party.
  They would also still try to pick holes in every policy. But if the Policies already were transparent enough that they highlighted the problems and the alternatives, then they could only reiterate the decision making process already adopted.



• Cross-party government -imagine Michael Howard inviting a Lib-Dem or New Labour minister into the cabinet in a position of power - because he was the right man for the job, not to gain votes.



• Central -Vs- local government - what if the MoSCoW prioritisation delegated the “Could have” and “Would like to have” to local government and gave them limited tax raising powers. Then local voters could decide on the policies that matter to them, and understand the cost of those policies. (I realise to some extent this does happen, but it needs greater granularity and better explanation and focus).



• Inclusive policies - sustainability and ecology as part of the national and global responsibilities; not the lip service that our existing government pays, but the inclusion of the responsibilities as part of the strategic vision for our nation.