Monday, 30 May 2011

Principles? When linking the word with politicians?

Daniel Hannan has a post on his Telegraph blog initially about a recent event in Malta an event which he then links to a call for a referendum in this country on EU membership.

Because politicians, in general, of all hues have been shown to be men and women without principle, anyone (even a cynic like me) is now justified to question whether (a) is what they say the truth and (b) do they actually mean what they say.

It is said that appearances are deceptive and because politicians have created a sense of distrust within the public's perception it is also reasonable to ask whether politicians are, in fact, that which they present themselves as. In Hannan's case it has raised certain questions, for example is he a Quisling; in other words was he 'inserted' into the Conservative Party to bolster its (non-existent) Eurosceptism while all the while working to further Europhile aims?

It is a sad state of affairs when we are unable to accept at face value our politicians and what they say. Unfortunately, again using Hannan as an example, when a politician makes the accusation that expansion of Frontex will result in the creation of a massive quango at a time when we in the UK are attempting to cut such bodies (see previous post) and, together with another supposed 'Eurosceptic' Douglas Carswell, can also propose the dissolution of Better Off Out, replacing BOO with a cross-party of MPs who would then be able to exert more control over the Euroscepticism message, one may be forgiven for doubting the words of any politician.

In all the words written and spoken by so-called Eurosceptic politicians (including, sad to say, Nigel Farage) who have been calling for a referendum on EU membership, I have yet to hear one word expressed about how that referendum should be carried out, how fairness can be achieved in both message content and financial funding. Not one word has been seen expressing the fears of the Eurosceptic public about matters raised in this previous post of mine.

If I have slighted any politician named above then, needless to say, I apologise; however by their own actions politicians have created that, now natural, distrust so they only have themselves to blame.


A K Haart said...

"It is a sad state of affairs when we are unable to accept at face value our politicians and what they say."

It is - and also sad that many voters have no interest in what they say. They know it isn't worth listening.

john in cheshire said...

Talk is cheap. Politicians will be judged by what they do. And I don't see much effort to actually take us out of the EU. By any of them.

WitteringsfromWitney said...

AKH: And that is where "Referism" comes into play. Politicos will be accountable every year and that would generate the participation of the electorate.

jic: See response to AKH as the same thing would apply to many areas of policy which the politicos consider 'bad' for us: EFU membership, death penalty, etc?