The Paucity of Political Talent in the UK - Blame the EU
Discussion
CivicDuties said:
For your hypothesis to hold, it would have to apply to every other EU country. Whilst there are some places in the EU run by utter political dreck, e.g Hungary and Germany, there are others where this not the case, e.g. Estonia, Lithuania, Finland.
So I think your proposition is flawed and very one-eyed in that it only looks at Britain. If you want to blame the EU for our continuing dearth of talent, you'll need much more evidence than simply pointing at the UK's politicians of today.
Once again missing the point and leaping (unnecessarily) to the defence of the EU.So I think your proposition is flawed and very one-eyed in that it only looks at Britain. If you want to blame the EU for our continuing dearth of talent, you'll need much more evidence than simply pointing at the UK's politicians of today.
There is a converse to this of course, in that certain EU members' politicians (Italy for example) are constrained when attempting to be bold and break a deadlock and do something different but come up against EU resistance. Ireland being another example.
Again though not the point. People are inherently lazy and will allow others to make their decisions for them. The UK politicians had nearly 5 decades of this and are now having to stand on their own two feet and they are all rushing around desperately trying not to.
Evercross said:
CivicDuties said:
For your hypothesis to hold, it would have to apply to every other EU country. Whilst there are some places in the EU run by utter political dreck, e.g Hungary and Germany, there are others where this not the case, e.g. Estonia, Lithuania, Finland.
So I think your proposition is flawed and very one-eyed in that it only looks at Britain. If you want to blame the EU for our continuing dearth of talent, you'll need much more evidence than simply pointing at the UK's politicians of today.
Once again missing the point and leaping (unnecessarily) to the defence of the EU.So I think your proposition is flawed and very one-eyed in that it only looks at Britain. If you want to blame the EU for our continuing dearth of talent, you'll need much more evidence than simply pointing at the UK's politicians of today.
There is a converse to this of course, in that certain EU members' politicians (Italy for example) are constrained when attempting to be bold and break a deadlock and do something different but come up against EU resistance. Ireland being another example.
Again though not the point. People are inherently lazy and will allow others to make their decisions for them. The UK politicians had nearly 5 decades of this and are now having to stand on their own two feet and they are all rushing around desperately trying not to.
That's of course if you want your hypothesis to be be taken seriously. If all you're seeking to do is find yet another thing to blame the EU for and have people nod along and validate your unevidence hypothesis, then I'll leave you to it.
P.S. I haven't "leapt to the defence of the EU" here, I'm asking you to evidence your hypothesis. The EU is a very flawed institution, but it is not the root of all ills in this country, particularly now we've left it.
Statements such was your original post here are where the laziness is. You've just had an idea, blurted it out, been challenged on ponying up some proper evidence for it and don't like it.
Edited by CivicDuties on Tuesday 5th March 11:45
CivicDuties said:
I'm not missing any point. You're trying to make the point: "Membership of the EU makes politicians lazy and therefore we have a dearth of political talent in the UK". If you want people to agree with that point, you have to evidence it. The only evidence you are proposing is the current dearth of political talent in the UK. That is insufficient evidence to support your hypothesis, because there are many other countries in the EU...
Indeed, but there's only one that was a member and then left. Correlation may not be the same thing as causation, but your point that there are plenty of EU members doesn't disprove my theory.What might would be if another was to leave and immediately demonstrate its native parliament to be a beacon of success. That of course could still be put down to a cultural difference between that country and the UK.
My point still stands insofar that most of the legislation that passed through the UK parliament between 1993 and 2020 was to ratify EU laws and ideas. That is a matter of record.
If someone is handing you ready-meals for 17 years and then they suddenly stop, how good a cook do you think you'd be if you've never prepared a plateful in that time?
Edited by Evercross on Tuesday 5th March 11:50
Earthdweller said:
The dumbing down of society in general
The professional politician, straight from school to university politics degree then into Parliament and becoming an MP … zero outside life skills
It’s not directed at any party but all of them but our national leaders are sadly no more competent than mediocre local councillors
The days of successful people from all walks of life choosing a later career in politics as a vocation are becoming very rare and that is our loss
Spot on! + as others have mentioned previously, electorate expectations are generally over ambitious or unrealistic. The professional politician, straight from school to university politics degree then into Parliament and becoming an MP … zero outside life skills
It’s not directed at any party but all of them but our national leaders are sadly no more competent than mediocre local councillors
The days of successful people from all walks of life choosing a later career in politics as a vocation are becoming very rare and that is our loss
Evercross said:
CivicDuties said:
I'm not missing any point. You're trying to make the point: "Membership of the EU makes politicians lazy and therefore we have a dearth of political talent in the UK". If you want people to agree with that point, you have to evidence it. The only evidence you are proposing is the current dearth of political talent in the UK. That is insufficient evidence to support your hypothesis, because there are many other countries in the EU...
Indeed, but there's only one that was a member and then left. Correlation may not be the same thing as causation, but your point that there are plenty of EU members doesn't disprove my theory.What might would be if another was to leave and immediately demonstrate its native parliament to be a beacon of success.
Our Parliament was stuffed with talentless goons at the General Elections subsequent to the referendum being held. And existing talented politicians were actively purged from the governing party at those elections (e.g. David Gauke, Philip Hammond, Dominic Grieve, Rory Stewart, and we got the likes of Jonathan Gullis and Lee Anderson in their stead). Which would be evidence for leaving the EU being a major cause of the dearth of political talent in our Parliament, rather than the reverse.
Evercross will be waiting for a while for another EU member to chuck it in. We are currently serving as a warning from history on that score. Remember Irexit? Itexit? Frexit?
Anyhoo, it's a weedy hypothesis. I don't see Switzerland on its arse or Norway, Iceland. Equally, you can look at Serbia, Turkey. Albania & see a different story. It's almost as if the whole idea is massively simplistic, failing to take into account any number of complex factors influencing national political discourse among diverse territories. No wonder Cranky is all over it.
Anyhoo, it's a weedy hypothesis. I don't see Switzerland on its arse or Norway, Iceland. Equally, you can look at Serbia, Turkey. Albania & see a different story. It's almost as if the whole idea is massively simplistic, failing to take into account any number of complex factors influencing national political discourse among diverse territories. No wonder Cranky is all over it.
Evercross said:
Indeed, but there's only one that was a member and then left. Correlation may not be the same thing as causation, but your point that there are plenty of EU members doesn't disprove my theory.
What might would be if another was to leave and immediately demonstrate its native parliament to be a beacon of success. That of course could still be put down to a cultural difference between that country and the UK.
My point still stands insofar that most of the legislation that passed through the UK parliament between 1993 and 2020 was to ratify EU laws and ideas. That is a matter of record.
If someone is handing you ready-meals for 17 years and then they suddenly stop, how good a cook do you think you'd be if you've never prepared a plateful in that time?
Parliament has been televised for decades now, including Select Committees and The Lords.. If you'd followed debates in the Commons and Lords together with those select committees for any decent length of time it is doubtful you would have made your un-evidenced assertion. What might would be if another was to leave and immediately demonstrate its native parliament to be a beacon of success. That of course could still be put down to a cultural difference between that country and the UK.
My point still stands insofar that most of the legislation that passed through the UK parliament between 1993 and 2020 was to ratify EU laws and ideas. That is a matter of record.
If someone is handing you ready-meals for 17 years and then they suddenly stop, how good a cook do you think you'd be if you've never prepared a plateful in that time?
Edited by Evercross on Tuesday 5th March 11:50
Your last paragraph shows a huge degree of misunderstanding of the UK relationship within the Eu and the legislative process.
I'm not sure about Evercross's hypothesis that the EU is responsible for our dearth of political talent because our governance was 'outsourced' to Brussels. As well as supposing that we have a particular shortfall in our political class (do we?), there are other members of the EU which don't seem to have fallen into the same malaise. And Britain was quite capable of malaise-ing itself before we were in the EEC/EU as well.
I think there is something to be said that the UK always had a different view of the EU and its relationship with it - that it was a remote foreign body that sent down edicts that Westminster just rubber-stamped, rather than being a political entity that we were full and equal members of and with its own processes to take part in and systems to engage with.
For the second time today on PH I'm going to mention that I briefly lived in Holland (in the early 2010s) and one of the things that struck me was that the EU and its affairs was much more 'normalised' in the political and news coverage. Debates and speeches in the EU Parliament were given similar prominence to those in national politics and Dutch politicians were asked and challenged on their approaches and dealing with the EU as items of interest/significance passed back and forth. This seemed very different to the UK media and the general political discourse where the workings of the EU were largely ignored unless there was some big seismic bust-up like the Lisbon treaty (which always seemed to be treated as some imposition from a colonial power) or Barmy Brussels Bungles Bonkers Bendy Bananas type headlines. The idea that the UK could engage with the process, had a say (up to and including a veto) in what the EU did, had representatives and influence, strategic allies and common interests that could be played with and furthered, was largely notable in its absence. Especially in comparison to how it seemed on the continent. I shared a house with a couple of Germans when I was at university and they made similar remarks.
This also plays into the state of things where the UK sees the EU as either 1) the dumping ground for politicians who have 'failed upwards' or have outstayed their welcome at home. 2) A venue for grifters who can enjoy a cushy lifestyle without proper oversight 3) tedious bureaucratic busywork that will get you no recognition or credit back home, even if it's actually dealing with vital macro-scale international policy. None of those things encourage us to send our best and brightest to Strasbourg or Brussels, and again I got a general impression that, for the Netherlands, European-level politics wasn't so remote and was more of a step up a ladder of prestige, or at least more recognised as a legitimate career move.
I think there is something to be said that the UK always had a different view of the EU and its relationship with it - that it was a remote foreign body that sent down edicts that Westminster just rubber-stamped, rather than being a political entity that we were full and equal members of and with its own processes to take part in and systems to engage with.
For the second time today on PH I'm going to mention that I briefly lived in Holland (in the early 2010s) and one of the things that struck me was that the EU and its affairs was much more 'normalised' in the political and news coverage. Debates and speeches in the EU Parliament were given similar prominence to those in national politics and Dutch politicians were asked and challenged on their approaches and dealing with the EU as items of interest/significance passed back and forth. This seemed very different to the UK media and the general political discourse where the workings of the EU were largely ignored unless there was some big seismic bust-up like the Lisbon treaty (which always seemed to be treated as some imposition from a colonial power) or Barmy Brussels Bungles Bonkers Bendy Bananas type headlines. The idea that the UK could engage with the process, had a say (up to and including a veto) in what the EU did, had representatives and influence, strategic allies and common interests that could be played with and furthered, was largely notable in its absence. Especially in comparison to how it seemed on the continent. I shared a house with a couple of Germans when I was at university and they made similar remarks.
This also plays into the state of things where the UK sees the EU as either 1) the dumping ground for politicians who have 'failed upwards' or have outstayed their welcome at home. 2) A venue for grifters who can enjoy a cushy lifestyle without proper oversight 3) tedious bureaucratic busywork that will get you no recognition or credit back home, even if it's actually dealing with vital macro-scale international policy. None of those things encourage us to send our best and brightest to Strasbourg or Brussels, and again I got a general impression that, for the Netherlands, European-level politics wasn't so remote and was more of a step up a ladder of prestige, or at least more recognised as a legitimate career move.
2xChevrons said:
I'm not sure about Evercross's hypothesis that the EU is responsible for our dearth of political talent because our governance was 'outsourced' to Brussels.
Worth mentioning that was a main Vote Leave trope. A poisoned wellspring that was never true, yet millions were convinced it was and here we find ourselves with the same notion being recycled into the more of the same with a slight veneer of debate to it.President Merkin said:
I don't see Switzerland on its arse or Norway, Iceland. Equally, you can look at Serbia, Turkey. Albania & see a different story.
When did any of those countries spend 47 years as part of a supra-national legislative body and then suddenly leave it?Please folks refrain from turning this into a pro/anti EU thread. It demonstrates a lack of basic reading ability and critical thought if you think for a minute that this is what this is.
2xChevrons said:
I'm not sure about Evercross's hypothesis that the EU is responsible for our dearth of political talent because our governance was 'outsourced' to Brussels.
That is kind of my point, but it is irrelevant that the outsourcing was to Brussels. More that it was outsourced at all. I've given another example of how it leads to a paucity of political talent that does not involve the EU ie. our devolved administrations within the UK.My objective point is that too many layers of government when in place for too long lead to inept policy, especially when the layers are deliberately maintaining a pretence that they are in charge but are exposed when the layers are stripped away and they suddenly have to be in charge. The recent Covid enquiries exposed a lot of the smoke-and-mirrors that was going on with leaders feigning competence while just dressing up someone else's ideas as their own (see Sturgeon as a classic example).
Edited by Evercross on Tuesday 5th March 12:34
Evercross said:
President Merkin said:
I don't see Switzerland on its arse or Norway, Iceland. Equally, you can look at Serbia, Turkey. Albania & see a different story.
When did any of those countries spend 47 years as part of a supra-national legislative body and then suddenly leave it?Earthdweller said:
The dumbing down of society in general
The professional politician, straight from school to university politics degree then into Parliament and becoming an MP … zero outside life skills
It’s not directed at any party but all of them but our national leaders are sadly no more competent than mediocre local councillors
The days of successful people from all walks of life choosing a later career in politics as a vocation are becoming very rare and that is our loss
^^this^^The professional politician, straight from school to university politics degree then into Parliament and becoming an MP … zero outside life skills
It’s not directed at any party but all of them but our national leaders are sadly no more competent than mediocre local councillors
The days of successful people from all walks of life choosing a later career in politics as a vocation are becoming very rare and that is our loss
Bo_apex said:
Earthdweller said:
The dumbing down of society in general
The professional politician, straight from school to university politics degree then into Parliament and becoming an MP … zero outside life skills
It’s not directed at any party but all of them but our national leaders are sadly no more competent than mediocre local councillors
The days of successful people from all walks of life choosing a later career in politics as a vocation are becoming very rare and that is our loss
^^this^^The professional politician, straight from school to university politics degree then into Parliament and becoming an MP … zero outside life skills
It’s not directed at any party but all of them but our national leaders are sadly no more competent than mediocre local councillors
The days of successful people from all walks of life choosing a later career in politics as a vocation are becoming very rare and that is our loss
The only politician I can think of in the last 30 years who had to step up to deal with a problem that wasn't his doing and who didn't have a playbook to follow or a crowd to mimic and hide within, or a bigger organisation to blame while doing nothing was Alistair Darling. The 2008 financial crisis hit and he took bold steps to shield the UK from the worst of it. He went against the herd mentality.
I can't think of a single person in the current crop across the entire political spectrum who would do the same today. Politics is now just a sales-pitch for someone else's ideas, until of course those ideas dry up.
I'll say again - why obsess about Israel and Gaza? Because it avoids talking about local policy because no-one has a clue what to do. For too long local policy and the money to enact it was handed down (why do you think local councils liked sticking EU flags on everything). It doesn't matter who was handing down, just that it was.
The consequence is an entire political class that is unfit for purpose because its purpose changed overnight and it wasn't prepared to step up.
Everyone is now waiting for a change of government, but what are we expecting? The opposition's tactic for victory is to almost literally sit on its hands, commit to nothing and try to say as little as possible about anything.
I can't think of a single person in the current crop across the entire political spectrum who would do the same today. Politics is now just a sales-pitch for someone else's ideas, until of course those ideas dry up.
I'll say again - why obsess about Israel and Gaza? Because it avoids talking about local policy because no-one has a clue what to do. For too long local policy and the money to enact it was handed down (why do you think local councils liked sticking EU flags on everything). It doesn't matter who was handing down, just that it was.
The consequence is an entire political class that is unfit for purpose because its purpose changed overnight and it wasn't prepared to step up.
Everyone is now waiting for a change of government, but what are we expecting? The opposition's tactic for victory is to almost literally sit on its hands, commit to nothing and try to say as little as possible about anything.
Edited by Evercross on Tuesday 5th March 13:44
Rivenink said:
This assumes that British politicians were ever not mostly corrupt, mostly incompetent, and mostly interested only in serving the wealthy.
You could probably name a handful of half decent politicans, but what about the rest?
So I think its a case that the EU has simply raised our expectations; against the reality that our politicans have always been s
ts. They just blamed everything that was unpopular on the EU; and took all the credit for popular stuff.
Now without the EU, we're seeing their incompetence and corruption fully exposed once more.
Generally this ^^^^ although for some of us it was for precisely this reason we voted leave - exposing incompetence and corruption.You could probably name a handful of half decent politicans, but what about the rest?
So I think its a case that the EU has simply raised our expectations; against the reality that our politicans have always been s
ts. They just blamed everything that was unpopular on the EU; and took all the credit for popular stuff. Now without the EU, we're seeing their incompetence and corruption fully exposed once more.
I feel the fundamental flaw is our anachronistic Parliamentary and civil service system:
1) Far too many MPs, 650, similar size countries have half as many representatives
2) Any amateur with no experience and who doesn't even live in the constituency can be a representative
3) Any amateur with no experience or talent can become a Minister
4) Impossible to fail in the civil service, you just get moved sideways or upwards
etc. etc, etc,
Our bureaucratic institutions might have functioned adequately in the days of pencil and paper, but not in the computer age, and definitely not in the internet age.
Ari said:
tangerine_sedge said:
Is this yet another thread trying to move the blame for political incompetence from the Tory party onto some other body?
There are good politicians of all hues in Parliament, but they are either currently in opposition, or relegated to the backbenches because the Johnson government (and subsequent iterations) decided that pro-EU Tories were persona non grata. The subsequent conveyor belt of sub-standard PM's and their cabinets is a direct result of this. It's time that the electorate faced up to the fact that the problem isn't British politics in general, but populist Tory politics, which promised the moon on a stick, but barely managed to deliver the stick.
Perhaps the self-immolation of the Tory party are the sunny uplands of Brexit we were promised
Where does he mention the Conservative Party? They're absolutely all lamentable. The Labour party simply isn't any opposition and doesn't have an idea between them, and the Liberal Party seem to have sunk without trace. There are good politicians of all hues in Parliament, but they are either currently in opposition, or relegated to the backbenches because the Johnson government (and subsequent iterations) decided that pro-EU Tories were persona non grata. The subsequent conveyor belt of sub-standard PM's and their cabinets is a direct result of this. It's time that the electorate faced up to the fact that the problem isn't British politics in general, but populist Tory politics, which promised the moon on a stick, but barely managed to deliver the stick.
Perhaps the self-immolation of the Tory party are the sunny uplands of Brexit we were promised
I'm old enough to remember proper politicians, Margaret Thatcher, Neil Kinnock, John Major, David Steel. You might not have liked them or their policies, but at least you got the sense that they believed in what they were doing and they felt it was for the good of the country. That they were professional politicians.
Now all we have is performing seals dog whistling their supporters in a popularity contest.
(*1) apart from b
hStewie Evercross said:
Hammersia said:
3) Any amateur with no experience or talent can become a Minister.
If I was being absolutely fair, which is my reputation on PH, she apparently does have qualifications outside of politics:
"From 1993 to 2000, she attended the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, where she gained a degree in electro-mechanical engineering design.[7]
In 2000, a month after she was due to graduate, she purchased a one-way ticket to Glasgow and planned to travel across Europe for two years, but ended up staying in Scotland.[5] After moving there, she worked as an engineer in the renewables sector, then later as a project manager."
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff