- Oct 17, 2008
- 13,270
Here’s something I’ve never understood. Or liked.
In this hypothetical (but very real in general terms, for a recent example look up Grant Shapps) how is it that one minute an MP is Environment Minister, an implied expert on the subject, then is “promoted” to a completely unrelated office like Home Secretary. How can one person be expected to be competent and knowledgeable about two completely areas?
I realise that the team of advisors and civil servants actually make the bulk of policy, but isn’t that itself a farce? That would (and does) make the cabinet minister in question basically just a box ticker.
People bang on about electoral reform, PR, FPTP, HTTP, KFC, MFI, DFS, etc - but my electoral reform would be a minimum of a working background in the area they are running on behalf of the whole country.
It’s something I’ve never understood and seems incredibly archaic.
In this hypothetical (but very real in general terms, for a recent example look up Grant Shapps) how is it that one minute an MP is Environment Minister, an implied expert on the subject, then is “promoted” to a completely unrelated office like Home Secretary. How can one person be expected to be competent and knowledgeable about two completely areas?
I realise that the team of advisors and civil servants actually make the bulk of policy, but isn’t that itself a farce? That would (and does) make the cabinet minister in question basically just a box ticker.
People bang on about electoral reform, PR, FPTP, HTTP, KFC, MFI, DFS, etc - but my electoral reform would be a minimum of a working background in the area they are running on behalf of the whole country.
It’s something I’ve never understood and seems incredibly archaic.