I cannot really put it any other way. It has been puzzling me for the past couple of weeks. Idea that we have a Prime Minister handling our affairs who in my opinion is directly responsible for them. Gordon Brown before becoming Prime Minister was Chancellor of the Exchequer for 10 years. Why is it in this time did he fail to regulate the banks. Surely that is the job of the Chancellor and if it is not his job than whose job was it? I believe that society should look after all its members. The current leadership of the Labour Party is an absolute disgrace.
How can they seek to justify the clawing back of bonuses and overpaid pensions. When they were responsible for the situation. The current witchhunt of Sir Fred Goodwin bears witness to a government that is seeking to shirk its responsibility. Only two years ago Sir Fred Goodwin was named business leader of the year. Now I do agree that he has been overpaid, but it is this situation that was allowed to continue for far too long. It is not rocket science to see the figures being quoted on the asset sheets were highly questionable. I don’t doubt for one moment that banking leaders the world over were aware of this situation. It would appear that they have chosen to ignore this and instead fill their own pockets. Of course everybody was quite happy to let this happen governments bankers and workers. As politicians look more towards the short-term satisfaction the general public will suffer long-term consequences. It is responsibility upon us all to seek long-term benefits. This was surely be the number one priority of an effective government.
This for me means that Gordon Brown must step down as Prime Minister. If the current government finds it acceptable that Fred Goodwin should retire from his post instead of clean up the mess he made (he is probably better equipped to do it than anybody else). Then Gordon Brown as the policy maker must forfeit his job. As a traditional Liberal supporter we must encourage and allow honesty to exist. It is only by having that we have a platform to deal with the root of the problems. Is this what voters asked for?
Mr Obama has done very well to get his stimulus package through both legislative houses in America. Bill Clinton in comparison failed in 1993 to get mere 16 billion through. There is lot at stake at the moment not only the economic recovery but also the integrity on a political leader to deliver on his promise.
Mr Obama methods could not be more contrasting to the out going republican administration who pursued a policy that America could dictate it’s terms to the world. With American debt spiralling out of control Mr Obama has realised that this is no longer case. It is sad reflection that would think that table banging politics could ever work. Mr Obama’s policy of bipartisan is still currently being subject to spoilt child tactics of the republicans. Who if they can not get there way take their ball and refuse to play.
He is on the right track. Better to engage although more costly and time consuming and win the battle of minds. There is only so much one can do. Without general consent it has no credibility. The key is how does one engage all parties. Choosing your method is critical, than again if it does not work you can always try another one. Cleary Mr Obama’s methode has worked.
Balancing the many pressures that are involved with running a business is never going to be a simple task. On one side you want to be liberal and understanding to all those around you. On the other side the job needs to get done. Creating the right environment where all can flourish can be compared to modern politics. Whether expected or not the change has been significant, in the last month not least just in the UK, where the change of Prime Minister has raised more questions than one might expect. Surely the role of a leader is not to make personally differentiating polices from other leaders. Maybe when one looks closely it is the male testosterone of beating the chest that rules the tribe.
An example of this is with the rise of China as a economic power. China has grown significantly in the last 10 years. As it prepares to take its place on the centre stage, it would seem that when such an event occurs it is also necessary to have sufficient power to wipe out any one that disagrees with your ideas. China has embarked on a Military program second only to America. Powerful as these countries may be, they still appear as a social mess. China with no recognisable form of democracy and America with not even the basic social system to ensure justice. Unfortunately neither of them seem preoccupied with these problems, much more concerned about who has the biggest tank, army, ship etc.