Venkat Raman
From our Leader (Digital Edition September 1, 2022)
In their book, ‘The Decline of Political Leadership in Australia?’ Jan Pakulski and Bruce Tranter argue in favour of changing the recruitment and careers of federal politicians in their country.
Both of them are academics from the University of Tasmania and have observed the Australian Parliament and more importantly its inhabitants over the years.
They say that popular portrayals and evaluations of Australian politicians are critical and harsh.
“Politicians and leaders today have been criticised for being opportunistic, dishonest (breaking promises), unreliable (changing views) and weak, especially in comparison with their predecessors. Comparative ratings of federal MPs in terms of ethics and honesty show not only a very low position relative to other occupations but also a significant decline after 1976, followed by small fluctuations over the last few decades,” they say.
Faulty Pre-Selection process
According to them, criticisms of Parliamentary pre-selection, as reflecting ‘branch staking,’ factional ‘corruption and cronyism’ and ‘patronage and power rather than merit’ are perennial, appearing in the media with depressing regularity and relating to all major parties.
If you find all of the above home truths, you could be forgiven for your thoughts.
Representation of people is an essential part of democracy and that representation is based on the choice of the people through the ballot on fixed terms- ranging from five years in most countries to three years as in Australia and New Zealand. Parliamentary democracies typically have two major parties, although, in many countries, collation between one or more minor parties with a major party has become the norm. Such a pattern is becoming a pattern, contributed party by voter apathy and partly by regional strength of political parties as in India. The Mixed Member Proportion (MMP) System, introduced in 1996, has created two tiers within the unicameral system – Elected Members and List Members.
Curiously, in New Zealand, List Members of Parliament are better behaved than their elected counterparts, probably because they are not directly elected by the people and therefore may not always enjoy their confidence.
The emerging pattern
If there is an emerging pattern the world over of politicians being stamped ‘unreliable’ ‘useless’ and ‘rouge,’ the system of selecting them must be faulty. Political aspirants gather public support, primarily within their electorate, get selected as the choice of their constituency, gain the acceptance of their Party and contest in the general election.
In New Zealand politics, there is no place for Independents, except in oblivion.
The collective noun for Parliament is the owl. A group of owls is referred to as a ‘Parliament.’ This is because owls are considered wise. In Greek mythology, owls are also known to be a symbol for Athena, the Goddess of wisdom and reason. The term ‘Parliament,’ is a collective noun for owls, meaning a count noun that denotes a group of individuals.
Journalists are aware of the roughness that surrounds politics and politicians. For all the noise and frenzy, which surrounds it, Parliament can be a lonely place. It can also breed an idle mind, and we all know how dangerous that can get.
It is a pity that New Zealand politics is descending to depths of depravity, precipitated by ill-conceived politicians, who fail to focus on the purpose of their presence in the debating chamber- to represent people, rather than squander time in pursuit of frivolity.
We will deal more with this issue but we recall the wisdom of Sir Winston Churchill: “It is better to be making the news than taking it; to be an actor rather than a critic.”
