It is unreasonable to expect politicians to be other than very dodgy people

It is unreasonable to expect politicians to be other than very dodgy people.?

This is because people with integrity speak the truth, and dodgy people tell people what they want to hear.?This means that dodgy people are more likely to be pre-selected as candidates, and very dodgy people are more likely to be elected to Parliament, owing to the truth being typically less palatable than what people want to hear.?Getting into Parliament is therefore about telling the biggest and most convincing lies.

This is principally the reason why politicians didn’t govern, in their own right, in the original Westminster system of government.

The Westminster strategy for producing good outcomes was to populate government with the best, most professional, or most scrupulous, in all fields of endeavour; to appoint the best of the best to executive leadership positions; and to empower them to govern, in their own right, within their competency and functional fields.?It was considered that they would collectively govern in the nation’s best interest.?They reasoned that the best of the best would be good people, and that government needed good people to run the machinery of government - the business of governance - in order to produce good outcomes. ?

They saw value in including politicians in the mix, but only in a servile capacity.?They thought that they would get bad government, bad law, and bad outcomes otherwise.?This is principally because good people and dodgy people see law differently.?Good people look at law and see responsibilities, whereas dodgy people see opportunities / loopholes.?They reasoned that both parties would need to work together in order to get good outcomes in the nation’s best interest; with good people being responsible for the administration of justice, and dodgy people being responsible for policy decisions.?The administration of justice included law enforcement, and the drafting of legislation.??

They reasoned that law would become a political tool if enforced by dodgy politicians. They furthermore thought that dodgy politicians would not have the competence to draft good legislation, owing to not having spent long enough in any job to develop competencies in anything, except dogginess; and that they would otherwise fill proposed legislation with loopholes to accommodate their dodgy mates.?It was also contended that dodgy people make better negotiators as they are fickle, can turn a blind eye to injustice, are prepared to compromise their principles, and can be relied upon to act in their own best interest.?It was reasoned that dodgy politicians would collectively make decisions in the nation’s best interest when legislation is drafted by good people and overseen by the people.?They have no other choice, if they want to stay in power. Finally, they thought that dodgy people would more likely work within the law if they thought that their dodgy mates on the inside had made the law - they would think that it is in their best interest to do so, when it is actually in everyone else’s best interest that they do so.

#government #governance #Westminster