Sunday, 1 March 2015

Language

Janet Street-Porter - not someone I usually quote - on the subject of politicians:

... The problem for all political leaders is that they may have policies, and they may have conviction, but none of that is getting through to disenchanted voters, a large percentage of whom haven't decided whether to bother voting, and if they do, who will get their support.

The tragedy of talented people on the left or right is that they are trapped in a system which has lost the support of a big proportion of the electorate. Politicians speak, and we don't understand what language they are using. It's not one in common usage. It's antediluvian, peppered with platitudes about 'hard-working people'.

She goes on:

If only we could remove modern politics' false demarcation lines. They seem redundant to most of the population who can't understand why essential stuff like the NHS and education, care of the elderly and transport aren't run through cross-party consensus aided by impartial advisers. Instead, convention dictates that each new government imposes a new strategy from the top, and huge sums of money are wasted implementing what I call macho dick-on-table strategy: change for change's sake.

We've already heard how Andrew Lansley's re-organisation of the NHS has been dubbed a 'disaster'. Ditto Michael Gove's rewriting of the school curriculum and examinations, now being toned down by his successor.

I seem to recall that we once had an independent civil service who ran things under the watchful eye of Ministers. Now we have Ministers thinking they are Chief Executives without any knowledge, or grounding in the relevant subjects - although most did go to school, some may have used public transport and some even the NHS - and interested in their own short-term career enhancements. 

Oh yes, it was so good to hear that the Education Minister wrote to the school of the three girls who gone to join ISIS. Well done on another sterling letter (gets publicity; no cost; appears caring).