Follow on Twitter
Subscribe by RSS
It is time for politicians to stop playing political games and answer straightforward questions with simple non-evasive answers, says Shaun Newman.
I find federal politics fascinating. Australians, in general, have no time for either Abbott or Gillard; neither leader is expected to deliver the truth and, on both sides, their senior lieutenants are unable to answer even simple questions put to them by journalists without some nonsensical response that relies heavily on spin and the evasion of the questions asked.
It’s no wonder Aussies have had an absolute gutful of politics on the federal stage.
Like many other low income Dads with a child at high school, I will welcome the latest leak from the federal budget in the form of the $820 education benefit for low income families — and am grateful for the assistance provided by the current government. Any assistance from the government is crucial to our family, however I would be happy if political parties simply declared the actions they take as simply for the benefit they bring rather than playing political games.
I have just watched Joe Hockey on the ABC Insiders program and was left frustrated by the way he skirts around simple questions; basic questions such as how the LNP budget papers would be legitimized, saying something like “watch this space”.
Why can’t these people simply answer the questions? This question only required a simple answer.
Mr. Hockey is not alone in his answering strategy. There are obviously answers to these questions, so why must they play “James Bond” and try to make out it is all top secret? We, the public, have a right to know the answers to such simple questions. Indeed, if we cannot receive an answer on such a simple subject as this, it makes one wonder what else is being hidden from us — which is why politicians are close to the bottom of the ladder on all known measures of public trust, usually below used car salesmen.
Unless, or until, politicians break out of this mode of haughty self-importance, it will remain difficult to vote for them.
We, the public, are not fools, and not do we have a lack of understanding of the issues, and are tired of being treated as though we are or have. Politics should return to a battle of philosophy and policy, well spelt out so that the average voter can make an informed decision about what it is they are actually voting for.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia License
3 Comments
We could also ask our journalists to start questioning politicians when they fail to answer a question, lie or contradict themselves. The pollies are only doing it because no one is stopping them.
This generation of politicians makes me despair. Oh for someoe with convictions!
This generation of journlaists have let us down.
You are right on the money, James Adelaide. I noticed the lack of challenge when he evaded the first question. At that point I went outside and chopped some firewood until enough time had elapsed for the Hockey to have left the scene. It’s as if the ABC has been put on notice that if they try and corral one of these spinners, especially from the right, they will not make themselves available in future. And Shaun, I have to disagree. You and I are in a very small minority that would be watching an alleged analysis of the politics of the day. I believe the majority of people are happy enough to read the sub editor’s header and the editorialized nuances of even the ABC news readers, and make life decisions and believe they are well informed.
Shaun Newman asks, “I have just watched Joe Hockey on the ABC Insiders program and was left frustrated by the way he skirts around simple questions; basic questions such as how the LNP budget papers would be legitimized, saying something like “watch this space”.”
Well, Shaun, I watched the same program and heard him say he would consider using the Parliamentary Budget Office promised by Labor but still not set up. In other words, he was waiting for the government to act to establish an independent office which would cost BOTH sides’ proposals. Labor doesn’t want that scrutiny on its proposals, so has been dragging its feet.
Labor also selectively leaked aspects of the coalition’s proposals which were submitted previously to Treasury’s costing, so they rightly distrust Labor’s motives. Labor will employ every dirty trick in the book to discredit the coalition’s figures (which, as we know, are prepared without the vast assistance of the departments of finance and treasury and many other inportant inputs) so they are quite right to be evasive about their election strategy and how their programs will be financed.
If you want to find out exactly what the coalition proposes Shaun, call for an election and you (and we) will quickly find out.
My gut feeling is that the coalition doesn’t need any proposals. They will win at a canter simply by being anything other than this dreadful government.
Why can't politicians answer a simple question with a straightforward answer? #AusPol #AusDem http://t.co/2Iv3qpVV