Thursday, 6 January 2011

Political Deceit

"We need to understand that the more government spends, the more freedom is lost....Instead of simply debating spending levels, we ought to be debating whether the departments, agencies and programmes funded by the budget should exist at all."

Ron Paul 25/03/2004

For some time it has been an unarguable fact that politicians of the Lib/Lab/Con treat the people of this country with contempt and in so doing promote the idea that they consider their paymasters as 'brain-dead'.

It will be remembered that between the dissolution of Parliament and a general election convention holds that the existing government cannot embark on new policies. It will also be remembered that it was during this period Alistair Darling signed up our country for participation in bailing-out eurozone member states. It is also a known fact that Darling did consult George Osborne on this matter, although the details of that consultation are not known. Douglas Carswell submitted a FOI request seeking information and the response from HM Treasury can be read here from which it can be seen that answers there are none.

Immediate questions arise, namely: Should Parliament not have been given the opportunity to approve such a policy? If, as Osborne intimated, he was against such a policy why did Darling proceed anyway? Or was Osborne actually in agreement, but refuses for political expediency to admit it? What actually passed between civil servants and politicians - and between the political parties - during the hiatus when Parliament was dissolved? Why does the Treasury refuse to disclose requested information? There is a distinct, highly questionable aroma pervading the entire episode and those involved have a responsibility to 'come clean' - after all, were we not promised transparent politics by the Coalition?

Still on the subject of political deceit, let us again consider Ed Miliband and the position he has adopted on the questions of the vat increase and 'cuts'. Presently castigating the Coalition for raising vat to 20%, Ed Miliband is shown to be hypocritical when, as Mandelson's memoirs informed us, he had in fact argued in Cabinet twice for such a move, in November 2009 and March 2010. As fullfact dot org shows, Ed Miliband - as with all politicians - tries to 'doctor' the facts by asserting that Labour was not to blame for the deficit. Study of this document from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) would suggest that public sector net debt had risen from £351 billion in May 1997 to £893 billion by May 2010. Couple that statistic with this graph from the Coffee House in August this year which shows Labour government spending in excess of receipts every year since 2002. The Adam Smith Institute also picks up on defects in Miliband's deficit argument here.

Whether our politicians lie or mislead is open to debate and readers can make their own minds up on that topic. Whichever side of the fence one comes down on in that debate, the inevitable conclusion is that our politicians are not truthful with their electorate - which begs the further question that, if this is so how on earth can an electorate be expected to make an informed choice for government - and is this not probably the initial reason voting figures have declined?

The longer this deceitful practice continues, the more likely the eventual 'popular uprising' that will result. Unfortunately, due to the shortcomings of our 'politically compliant' media, I am initially at a loss how to hasten the popular uprising.

Suggestions, anyone?

No comments: