They’ve had a row over the contents of The Budget apparently.
The Chancellor wanted The Budget to include big cuts in public spending to tackle the nation’s deficit – it’s the biggest since the Second World War –but he was overruled by the Prime Minister, who feared that might lead to disaster for him at the next Election.
Now, I know this comparison is very local, so I apologise to anyone reading this who lives further afield than South Yorkshire and doesn’t know what I am on about, but I can’t help thinking this is a very similar scenario to what’s happening in Maltby and in fact Rotherham in general.
I always thought that the role of a Councillor, MP or Prime Minister was to do what was right and for the benefit of their locality, ward or country. It seems that this is not so and that the main purpose of these elected people is to make sure that they stay elected, next time around and for the forseeable future (preferably at least until retiring age and definitely without consideration of the electorate complicating the issue)
I am not so politically unaware to think that any party will continue to grow if it’s manifesto keeps changing to something that does not resemble the original that they were voted in on. But I do believe that they should change what they told us they believed and intended doing, if situations arise that need this. Surely, then it is only reasonable to expect that views can be changed – but only when the interest of the electorate is being served, not when the credibility of the party or party member is at risk.
Perhaps I just don’t understand party politics (I know I don’t agree with the governing party politics of RMBC or Britain ) But my democratic vote goes to the person who shows to me that they are working for the local community or the wider beneficial growth of the country – not for their own personal climb up the ladder of political power.