You said it, David Laws.
No one disputes that George Osborne is unfit to exercise these, or any other, responsibilities. But that is not a reason to take them away from Ministers who are drawn from and accountable to Parliament. It is merely a reason not to give them to George Osborne. After the handing over of monetary policy to the Bank of England, and now this, what will the Treasury be for? Why bother having a Chancellor of the Exchequer?
This proposal is rather like the handing over of control of parliamentary expenses to some quango, or the presently modish demand for that foreign and deeply flawed device, the referendum, to be used on this, that or the other. It assumes that we can never have better parliamentarians. But we can, and we must. So we must set about the task of identifying and electing them.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment