Notions of political loyalty

“Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous,” Julius Caesar in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar.

IT was the ancient Greeks who cautioned us to beware of strangers bearing gifts…

This time of political consequence is reason for serious debate: to whom do elected politicians owe their loyalty? Is it their nominated party, or to those who trusted and voted them into office?

It is a vexed question, and one which, recently, seems to have garnered more dominance than previously.

Regardless of consequences, incumbents will, in faithful support of a government initiative, or a public perception, stubbornly ignore the voice of any dissenting voter.

Obfuscation, disingenuousness, contrary defensiveness, political rhetoric, ambiguous hyperbole, and prevarication are classified political tools-of-trade; to be used loosely and wantonly in the pursuit of polling success.

Chequebook politics has been normalised.

Voters need to ask: have we arrived at a political impasse?

Are we being best served by the prevailing ethos of staying in power versus that of good governance?

Have politics become too political?

While that may seem oxymoronic, there is reasonable support for the notion our elected representatives, in both tiers of state government, are highly politicised, and are more likely to adhere to a party platform rather than best serving the wants and needs of the community.

It is not a phenomenon exclusive to any one faction. Politics have become opportunistic. There is an hubristic swagger to campaigning.

Much political energy is devoted to demonising any opposition, regardless of the truth – which is, too often, the victim of political slyness.

There is a determination to persuade the voter, irrespective of the calumny; to say whatever it takes to achieve an end. To win is all!

At this time of a state election, voters are being bombarded with a surfeit of spending promises and improvements to our way of life, and basic operational and community infrastructure.

Regrettably, too many of the promises are more about grasping, or retaining, power, than any significant, long-term vision for the future. Some incumbents are more interested in safe-guarding sinecures than resolving district problems.

Recently in Ballarat, the local members’ lack of any meaningful support for those adversely affected by the State Government road works in Albert Steet, Sebastopol, was reprehensible.

Patently, the government initiative was deemed of greater significance than the financial calamity suffered by numerous local businesses as a consequence of administrative ineptitude.

Legality notwithstanding, the decision by former Prime Minster, Scott Morrison, to secretly appoint himself to five national portfolios is cause for alarm. His action demonstrates a lack of regard for the system and trust.

Alarmingly, Australians are losing faith in the democratic system.

Voters are rendered impotent to change the status quo; measured protests fall on deaf ears; dissenters are labelled malcontents; opposing viewpoints are publicly pilloried; important questions are left unanswered, or platitudinally deflected. The ties of loyalty are dangerously blurred.

Before casting your vote, spare a thought for what became of the trusting, ancient city of Troy…