Posts
With regard to honor, a phrase used by Chaucer to Adhemar (in the film a Knight's Tale) comes to mind and can be used for any politicians who did not complain about it earlier ...
"You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting".
A new breed of politician is now needed - where values are demonstrated and not simply espoused. A new form of 'economics' is also required - one not based on "Poweromics" *
Let's hope we have not long to wait before hard-working people wish it so and are given more meaningful forms of democracy to make it so. One vote every 5 years hardly does this, especially as most votes count for very little as it's only marginal constituencies that normally determines who Governs - proportional representation would arguably be a start - but we don't even have that ... more Poweromics I'm afraid!
David Clift, a Future 500 leader, founder of Leanomics** and a Poweromics* blogger
* Poweromics = People use position and power for their own personal gain, based on poor moral values, self interest and greed.
** Leanomics = People take responsibility for adding value and continuously improving the situation for others (e.g. customers, communities, overall environment), based upon fundamental values such as trust, honor, responsibility and respect.
The internet has changed the rules and will transform everything, including 'politics' and 'economics'. Google's mantra is "Do no harm". The Leanomics mantra is "Do good".
Comment 298 (DialSquareDomination)
The farce that is our Parliament is laid bare today with the Speaker giving a statement about how "honourable" members should adhere to the spirit, not the letter of the law.
1) Michael Martin is one of the worst offenders, and has no right to lecture the house on these matters. In fact, he should stand down for bringing the office into disrepute.
2) MPs make the law, so if there is a difference between the "spirit" and "letter" of this law, it is they who are to be held accountable.
3) Bringing the police in on this matter was unwise. It does not play well to the public, and what are the chances of anyone being prosecuted, given that the High Court ruled this information was in the public interest, and should have been released. This ruling was made in October 2008. Since that time, MPs, with the full support and backing of the Speaker, have done their utmost to prevent that happening, wasting hundreds of thousands of taxpayer pounds trying to mount a legal defence against it, and after that failed, trying to alter the FoI laws so that they did not apply to them.
The fact that we can have such a poor Speaker who is patently not fit-for-purpose, only serves to highlight the dysfunctionality of our parliament.
And the fact we have to rely on independent bloggers, campaigners and whistleblowers to get this information into the mainstream media only serves to highlight how the relationship between the "indepedent" press and the government. The government says "Jump", and the press says "How high?".
Disgraceful - politicians and political journalists everywhere should at least hold their heads in shame, if they have neither the morality nor the courage to do the decent thing and resign.
A sad day for this country - there have been quite a few over the last twelve years. We sorely need a change in government, a change in representation (voting system), and a written constitution.
Don't delay it further by voting for either of the two big parties ever again.
Comment 350 (Leanomist)
As posts 342/346 point out ...
"Oh for a Jeremy Paxman. If he was still doing Newsnight there would not be enough room in the studio for all the bones of the MP's he had savaged ... but ... he still does Newsnight*!
I have added a comment below from the papers way back in 2006. Jeremy was arguably one of the better and more capable journalists in the BBC then too (he was capable of doing the right thing - but perhaps he has be curtailed/bribed too).
"Jeremy Paxman has become the latest BBC star to fall victim to the mole who is leaking corporation staff salaries to the tabloid newspapers. Paxman's pay packet for hosting BBC2's University Challenge quiz is £240,000, the equivalent of £7,741 a show, according to a leak published in the Sun today. The University Challenge wage is on top of the £800,000 Paxman is believed to earn for presenting Newsnight, bringing his annual BBC salary to more than £1m, if the figures are to be believed".
We have to remember Poweromics* is happily at work within the BBC too** as the blog http://poweromics.blogspot.com readily points out ...
To show the honesty, independence and integrity of the BBC, can we have an update on BBC pay/expenses/perks once the Politicians pay/expenses has been sufficiently covered?
Perhaps you could lead the way on this Nick?
David Clift, a Future 500 Leader
* POWEROMICS = People use position and power for their own personal gain, based on poor moral values, self interest and greed.
** Let's see if the BBC remove this post because of this point. I'll tell you if they do.
Comment 351 (Leanomist) - after 350 was removed by the BBC ! Honorable no more - are we referring to politicians, the media or both? Poweromics* is at work everywhere - as the blog http://poweromics.blogspot.com readily points out ...
And it's up to us to change it ...
David Clift, a Future 500 Leader
* POWEROMICS = People use position and power for their own personal gain, based on poor moral values, self interest and greed.
