Dizzy picks up on a piece by Danny Finkelstein in The Times today about Clare Shortâ€™s desired hung parliament. Danny makes a good point regarding the contradictory world of politicians; represent your electors versus toeing the party line:
“Voters and the media ask parties for total unity and want MPs to be completely authentic. Politicians are simultaneously expected to say exactly the same thing as every other member of their party and to be true to themselves. This is obviously impossible…. Bridging the unbridgeable contradiction between unity and authenticity has turned politics into an elaborate game for insiders.” [Via The Times]
Of course that elaborate game for insiders is being challenged by the rise of British political bloggers such as Guido and Iain Dale but the game goes on none the lessâ€¦Dizzy thinks he might have a solution:
â€œIf politicians are only able to genuinely “re-connect” with the electorate by having the freedom to say what they believe rather than falsely maintaining an air of unity, does that not mean the abolishment of the whip as a concept to some extent? Does it not also imply a rethink, perhaps a regressive rethink, of the very role of political parties in Britain today?
Daniel Finkelstein has certainly highlighted the problem, is the solution a return to a Parliament of individuals rather than party political robots?â€ [Via Dizzy Thinks]
|Post to del.icio.us|
Filed in: Current affairs,Party politics