I think that sums up completely the problem with politics.
Originally Posted by Dos_Box
We want people who will be good at running the country... but to get to run the country you have to win a popularity contest; I don't think there are many people with the skills to do both. Although maybe someone who just did an exceptionally good job would automatically be popular? Who knows.
The trouble is that what you think is an exceptionally good job may not be the same as what I think.
Originally Posted by Batman
Many people will have their views of what's good coloured by what they read in the press. Often, the owners of those papers have a different view of "good" from many average people. For example, the Sun and Times are owned by a billionaire who doesn't live in the UK. The Daily Mail, the Metro papers and many local papers are owned by Viscount Rothermere, a near billionaire "non-dom". The Daily Telegraph is owned by the Barclay brothers - again, non-dom.
This can then distort people's views of the political system - I suspect Rothermere et al would like the lowest possible taxes and that's pretty much all they care about so they can slag off anything which any government does, knowing that they don't need the schools, hospitals, roads etc that the taxes may be paying for.
If you read in your paper every day about the dreadful state of the country and how it's caused by the current government then you probably start to believe it - even if it's probably not completely true.
Going back on topic, the Hillingdon Tories have cut back Hillingdon's ability to bid for funding via BS21 and they think they can justify cutting back work on the bid because they think that funding for the project is likely to be scaled back.
If this is the case then ministers and civil servants will target resources only the projects which they feel are going to be the most effective.
So to cut back the funding on Hillingdon's bid will mean the borough is less likely to succeed.
Same old Hillingdon Tories, unable to do their sums - idiots.