When electing a president or prime minister it is equally important to consider both aspects of leadership. In the UK we do not directly elect a Prime Minister we vote in the main for a political party. It is the winning party which chooses to select its leader and the leader of the winning party is invited by the monarch to become Prime Minister. Our monarch of course is not elected.
It is an odd system of government which is based on tradition and convention. Because the monarch has no real power, to control legislation or political administration, the Prime Minister effectively becomes the head of state and head of government rolled into one. The monarch's head of state powers are delegated completely to the Prime Minister. If you started with a blank sheet of paper you would probably not invent such a system of government which invested so much power in one person.
In the UK we have seen the political parties set out their stall for the 8th of June General Election.
The Conservative party are focusing very much on the qualities of their leader because their policies for detaching the UK from the EU are either weak of non-existent.
The Labour party is focusing more on policy because they know that their leader is perceived to be weak but would their policies be any better?
How should a judgement be made? It is a fine balancing act, so should policy be more important than personality? My view is that policy should prevail. A leader could become infirm or even die in office to be succeeded by someone who is stronger or weaker. We give too much emphasis to how a personality appears on television and social media sites. A politician who is perceived to be strong could easily be allowed by the public to implement weak policies.
It is abundantly clear that the electors and the press must always objectively scrutinise the policies of all leaders to avoid policy mistakes from being made. Our system invests so much power in one individual. The ideal situation for me would be to have a strong leader implementing carefully thought out policies but we rarely achieve this in the UK. I shall think very carefully before I vote and I hope you will think carefully too.
Friday, 21 April 2017
Friday, 7 April 2017
Once again the human species shows how low it can fall in Syria
Once again the human species shows how low it can fall in Syria. The Syrian conflict must be one of the worst civil wars ever. The United States has now suddenly changed its policy and has decided to bomb Syrian airbases because of the use of gas warfare. At the moment, there is no direct proof as to who used nerve gases or chlorine or both against innocent civilians. The United Nations have not yet concluded their investigations. The Assad regime is obviously a suspect but the opposition guerrillas have shown themselves capable of deploying nerve gases too.
Nerve gases should never have been invented and the same should be true for biological weapons. They are a scourge which no human being should ever get involved with. There is something wrong with human thought processes. It was mother nature, or perhaps even God, that gave us intelligence and rationality. The forces of nature ,however, did not deem that our intellectual abilities should have been directed towards making weapons of mass destruction to support tribal divisions and hatred. We have chosen this route ourselves. If we are not careful we will destroy ourselves.
The universe will get along fine without us and we won't be missed.
Nerve gases should never have been invented and the same should be true for biological weapons. They are a scourge which no human being should ever get involved with. There is something wrong with human thought processes. It was mother nature, or perhaps even God, that gave us intelligence and rationality. The forces of nature ,however, did not deem that our intellectual abilities should have been directed towards making weapons of mass destruction to support tribal divisions and hatred. We have chosen this route ourselves. If we are not careful we will destroy ourselves.
The universe will get along fine without us and we won't be missed.
Monday, 3 April 2017
Let's wave the flag for Gibraltar
The border between Spain and Gibraltar was closed by the Spanish between 1969 and 1985. The border was opened by Spain just before in joined the EEC/EU in 1986. It may have escaped the attention of "Brexiters" that Britain was at liberty to veto the accession of Spain to the the EEC. It was therefore in Spain's interests to open the border with the Rock. It was also in the interests of Gibraltar which has become a rich and easy going country at peace with itself.
Every day 10,000 Spaniards cross the border to work in Gibraltar which has a resident population of 30,000. No one in Gibraltar resents the presence of these "foreigners" and the economy of the Rock is reliant upon labour from neighbouring La Linea and its immediate surroundings. Over 90% of Gibraltarians voted to stay in the EU. Britain and Spain must take this into account when a Brexit deal is negotiated.
A dispute between Spain and Britain over the future of the Rock is in no one's interests.
We now have a former senior British politician invoking the Falkland islands spirit by hinting that a dispute with Spain could be settled by military means . This is laughable or the following reasons.
1) The US would not allow it as it has been opposed to British colonialism since the end of the second world war.
2) Britain does not have the military power to invade anywhere on its own; we have a significantly reduced army and no aircraft carriers with aircraft on them.
3) Spain could easily invade Gibraltar across the isthmus. It would then be almost impossible to retake the peninsula without severe civilian casualties.
Using military force would be a national humiliation and a disaster for Britain and Gibraltar. It is a delusion that we could just raise the flag and Spain would fall into line. Brexit has thrown up another diplomatic and political problem for the UK.
If we are not careful the fall out from Brexit could lead to equally disastrous consequences for Britain on both the domestic and international fronts. Who are the real patriots the flag wavers or the realists?
Every day 10,000 Spaniards cross the border to work in Gibraltar which has a resident population of 30,000. No one in Gibraltar resents the presence of these "foreigners" and the economy of the Rock is reliant upon labour from neighbouring La Linea and its immediate surroundings. Over 90% of Gibraltarians voted to stay in the EU. Britain and Spain must take this into account when a Brexit deal is negotiated.
A dispute between Spain and Britain over the future of the Rock is in no one's interests.
We now have a former senior British politician invoking the Falkland islands spirit by hinting that a dispute with Spain could be settled by military means . This is laughable or the following reasons.
1) The US would not allow it as it has been opposed to British colonialism since the end of the second world war.
2) Britain does not have the military power to invade anywhere on its own; we have a significantly reduced army and no aircraft carriers with aircraft on them.
3) Spain could easily invade Gibraltar across the isthmus. It would then be almost impossible to retake the peninsula without severe civilian casualties.
Using military force would be a national humiliation and a disaster for Britain and Gibraltar. It is a delusion that we could just raise the flag and Spain would fall into line. Brexit has thrown up another diplomatic and political problem for the UK.
If we are not careful the fall out from Brexit could lead to equally disastrous consequences for Britain on both the domestic and international fronts. Who are the real patriots the flag wavers or the realists?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
