Saturday, 20 November 2010

Cameron acts quickly on the wrong man

It is not shocking to imagine a peer being out of touch with the general public and while Lord Young resigned quickly after making a candid remark without any heart felt concern and not incerting the context himself. His points that some people are doing ok out of the last recession is true. If you have a manageable mortgage and are paying lower interest rates and are in a safe job then compared to the 1980's recession when interest rates were over ten percent you are better off.

Politicians should be careful how they express themselves but we the public want them to speak candidly or truthly. However when they do they are forced to resign. How is this supposed to help politics in this country if the politicans can't talk in public about any subject without such scrutiny or reflection of the context.

This is why political interviews are so lame these days. They can's express themselves. This means that they become aloof and can't answer question directly for fear of being quoted out on context, leading to the sack. Interviews these days are more like a game then an insight into the subject at hand.

Only a very few politicans can get away with using language that is accepted as their way, like say Vince Cable or Boris Johnson and even they avoid questions.

Ed Miliband also took some time of paternity leave to put the knife further into lord Young. But Ed should be careful because this just encourages the Tories to do the same back when someone from Labour speaks out of turn. And they will someone always does.

It is interesting how David Cameron has acted so quickly over the his photographer and website producer and Lord Young but has still done nothing about media advisor Andy Coulson who was editor of the News of the World during their illegal phone hacking operation.

So anyone fancy becoming a politican then?

Check out the Lord Young fact check here

7 comments:

  1. I agree there was some truth to what Lord young said though doubting the recession was a tad fool hardy

    ReplyDelete
  2. Andy Coulson quite rightly resigned from his job at the News of the World due to that scandal. He took responsibility as the boss, even though not implicated himself.

    Are you really saying that he should never be allowed to work again, should be hounded from every job, due to an event over which he was never charged with any crime, has never even been arrested (or I think interviewed under caution, unlike certain politicians)? Even convicted criminals are allowed to work again.

    ReplyDelete
  3. No of course not. But this is no normal job. he is now working for the Tory party. I know he was never charged but surely someone who resigned has been tainted and is free to take up roles but not related to government. Its interesting how Cameron has acted so quickly for some individuals and not so quickly for others.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Strange that any respectable political party would consider employing the editor of a gutter-rag like the News of the World in a senior role. But I guess that Rupert Murdoch made that decision not Cameron.

    ReplyDelete
  5. But how can Cameron sack a man like Coulson (who he took on knowing he was either incompetent or a something worse) when there are alleged "secret dossiers" just waiting in News International memory banks to be utilised.
    Coulson would appear to be a minor, but important, player in a drama involving politicians, police and media collusion which is pretty worrying for those who believe in democracy.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The reason that Lord Young was sacked was because if he was right there is no way that the mantra of everything is down to the previous Labour Government would stick.
    If every time someone said something ridiculous was sacked/resigned we wouldn't have a Prime Minister now would we?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dazmando

    So what? Coulson actually behaved far more honourably in the NOTW than most politicians and their lackies, in that he actually resigned and accepted responsibility despite there being no evidence he knew what was going on. You are saying because he was honourable he should never work again in the field for which he is qualified and experienced.

    ReplyDelete