Peter Mathews the most impressive backbencher?

[hiding behind a poster]

I totally agree. It just makes sense, we can no longer afford to have unqualified people managing departments they know nothing about. I think that relying solely on the advice of unelected civil servants is in fact anti-democratic as while the politicians may change they, the civil servants, do not. In that scenario the real government (civil servants) never in fact changes.

Teachers and accountants were fine at one time but in the globalised and high-stakes world we live in now, it just doesn't cut it anymore. We deserve to have the best and most qualified people running the country and not ex-teachers or some politicians son/daughter who became career politicians and never spent a day of their lives working in the real world, solving real problems and gaining real experience. We need real experts running suitable government departments, it's just the logical way of doing things. That's how things work in the real world so why should it be any different in politics.

You get the feeling they don't want experts managing government departments but rather prefer to rely on the advice of civil servants. Why would this be I wonder?

Maybe their afraid of real change.

One tiny flaw in your argument. The Minister is not there to manage his Department.

[hiding behind a poster]

Fair point but much more important is their philosophy on equality & social justice. If they believe in cravenly cowering to their masters [EU, banksters, bondholders, the wealthy, Britain, etc] as FG/FF/LP do, all the technical expertise in the world won't prevent them from making the wrong decisions.

Except, of course, that the voters may not share your view - they certainly didn't last February, when the "burn the bondholders" crew got about 20% of the vote, while those seeking to renegotiate the bailout while also being realistic enough to know that we're responsible as a country for our own actions, got close to 80%. That's democracy.

[mido]

i have a rather draughty door at present- peter strikes me as the perfect draught excluder- where can he be found?

[hiding behind a poster]

Grand, grand.

But please explain the smugness of the 'landed gentry' air he has about him, if you don't mind.

It turns people off big time.

To me, he is everything that is wrong about common political representation.

Uuughh!

The two key words are highlighted. YOU may think he's landed gentry or whatever, but he ran in a democratic election, and the people elected him. A lot more than can be said for you.

[Norman Bates]

Remind me again: what is it that Peter has done that impresses?

[moralhazard77]

One tiny flaw in your argument. The Minister is not there to manage his Department.

Direct then, or is that not the correct terminology either.

If that's the only "tiny" flaw you could find in my argument then you ain't got much.