The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Sensible Selectivity

Sensible Selectivity

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
I've often wondered if we should have some sort of criteria for those who stand for election?
A minimum standard of intellectual ability would seem a good place to start. Perhaps a minimum time spent in the workforce too?
It would appear we are none of us overly impressed with the current crop, whatever our individual persuasions, so is there any way we could improve the breed by a more careful selection?
Posted by Maximillion, Monday, 8 June 2009 8:22:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Maximillion, I agree in part but many of the current lot on both sides are highly educated and have work experience outside parliament. Some not much I admit. This does not seem to influence them once they have entered the hallowed halls of politics.

How does one test for moral fibre or character traits - such as honesty, integrity and enthusiasm to represent their electorate - that we would like to see in our politicians? That is the real challenge.
Posted by pelican, Monday, 8 June 2009 10:44:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Max,

I would expect a politician to be literate,
and have the necessary qualifications for a
life in the public domain. I would expect them
to have some knowledge and definitely an interest
in - social, economic, domestic and
foreign policy issues.

We elect them to represent us in
government, act on our behalf and protect our
interests.

I would expect them to be committed to
helping people. To have the moral desire to do good.
I think it would be great to have
some sort of background check and honesty test to
see if there are any tendencies towards corrupt
practices.

They must be quick thinkers, able to spot weaknesses
in their opponent's arguments. They must also be
resilient and able to cope with criticism and angry
protests.

Their personal lifestyle should be able to
take media scrutiny. They must have good 'people skills.'
That is - they must be good listeners -
(listen carefully to people, and ask the right questions -
in order to help solve problems). They must be approachable.
They must be able to work well with others - such as local
authorities, police, colleagues et cetera.

They must be able to debate
issues - think on their feet. They must be 'media savy'
that is - able to handle the media - be it TV, newspapers,
et cetera. Being good public speakers would also help.
And of course it goes without saying they must have a
love for this country and her people.

That's my wish-list for now.
Posted by Foxy, Monday, 8 June 2009 11:55:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
yeah max i often thought it should be a post university course..[where all the applicants work the whole dept before being selected to be the minester over it

we well know how everything must be forward planned..[so you enter politics by working in the chosen field..demands a minimum level of qualification...where..[there are set measures to become the pm..eventually..

[id say by having been foreign minester/treasuror/armed forces/govener general/social securioty and public welfare..[for a minimum standard]...and a certainty that true public service is sought[not just the lurks/powers or secret knowledge/or high power contacts]

we could do worse than having minesters who actually serve..[and served well,..running the govt portfolios...i often thought also that those who hold their positions..must fully declare all their wealth/personal/business intrests..[that get set aside and run for them..while they are in govt positions..[for all govt workers]

i also see a vision where the crossover from govt..into any industry their portfolio oversees or regulates..is made a treasonous crime[like the many health minesters working for medical-industry]..or defense minesters working in the private arms industry

[depending on the secrets they bear..some may never be allowed to work in certain industries..ever again..[or sit on certain boards..ever again..[where they have been informed of the deptmental secrets..[for egsample]

there should be set oversights and constant testing..[of knowledge and coruptability]...public service..should be a prime calling..[and the assosiation with conflicting special intrests must be ended,

currently special intrests..sheppard their people into power positions..[to the level..where now lawyers can make laws ..then have the ability to rule on them..[or from lawyer become law maker]...the sepperation of powers has become too muddied

govt workers all should live purely off govt credit..[no extra cash/assets/share or outside intrests]..and be strictly policed..to ensure public service to the public weal...does not became the road to wealth..via powers obtained by deliberated collusions
Posted by one under god, Monday, 8 June 2009 12:21:18 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The first thing to do is get rid of the party system. A lot of sincere people (probably) go in with good intentions, but the party machine soon brings them into line. Once they are elected, the party comes first, second and third.

In the last federal election, I didn't vote in the lower house - there was no party or person there I wanted - and voted for an independent in the Senate.

I intend to do the same in the future, looking for someone who will represent me and my electorate; I'm not interested in anyone who goes in to prop up some party and its dogma. It won't do much good unless most other people do the same, but at least my consience is clear.
Posted by Leigh, Monday, 8 June 2009 12:36:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It seems to me that it would be more beneficial to have some sort of character test for journalist. Our National Broadcasters are about as low as they can go (as shown by the Chasers) and our private run media is predominantly trash. Political correctness has led us to a place where truth has no meaning. Those championing moral relativism only scream when their own version of absolutes is challenged. We have seen recently great criticism of the Indonesian Government because our media convinced people that a family up to their ears in drugs was innocent. We have the fallacy of man made global warming causing our politicians looking very dumb indeed as they swallow a fantasy in the name of science. Poor old Wong and Garret look like fools along with Turnbull. We have State Premiers afraid to criticize the failed policies of multiculturalism instead blaming 'racist' Aussies for their ridiculous policies. No wonder Pauline got over a million votes.

The ridiculous notion that private behaviour has nothing to do with public performance allows corrupt Politicians to flourish like never before. The Catholic church has taken a long time to learn that they need to vet potential Priests for character if they want to eliminate child molesters. THe strange thing is that a Bill of Rights will probably prevent them from doing this in the name of equality.
Posted by runner, Monday, 8 June 2009 2:54:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy