Update on Thursday : apologies for delay.
Yesterday’s rentrée prevented us from extending the interesting debate sparked off by the last post. Meanwhile interesting developments in DimechGate might allow more factual light to be thrown into the miasma of different interests and allow us to comment more clearly on the rot in Local Councils and the parallel worries associated with party politics. Later today we will be posting a full post on this issue and the main theme will b “Why Party?” or what is the purpose of party participation in Local Councils. What guarantees are political parties giving voters? What is their constitutional role in the system? How much control can a party legally and effectively exert on its list of candidates? Can we rightly assume that a party is “vetting” its candidates for suitability to run for election? Can we equally assume that a party provides a support structure for its councillors that makes them more efficient purely through the economies of scale and continuity? Do our parties have anything that could be described as local policies (applied in multiple councils where possible)? Are parties using different measures and standards for their mini-politicians? Once again, what is the measure that tells us when the balance of loyalty to party vs loyalty to constituents has been broken? The constitution makes little or no mention of political parties – they have “infiltrated” the system by custom and usage – is it really that wrong for an elected person from a constituency to trump his party loyalties with those towards his constituency – especially when the so-called “party principles” are not so clear in certain cases? All that and more… later on J’accuse.
Related articles by Zemanta
- Vote Independent? Not if you believe in democracy (thepunch.com.au)
- The Weirdest Political Parties Of All Time (PICTURES) (huffingtonpost.com)
- Pirate Party Strikes Hosting Deal With Wikileaks (torrentfreak.com)
