Andrew D Atkin
Take a look at this blog of mine. Here I am being entirely open with what I think and why I think it, including the controvercial bits. On this blog people are invited to respectfully oppose and maybe correct me, which is the way it should be. And this presentation (blog) is fairly easy for me to do.
So should every prospective politician do this? Should every politician first openly define themselves as an individual mind, using this new tool the Internet? (And should they develop that independent expression before signing up to a political organisation, for where they must then part-adopt a "gagging order" in the name of representing their political union's collective view?). In my view, in today's world, there is no excuse not to do this.
Hence, I believe this should be the new political standard that we (the public) should be demanding. Our first question to any prospective politician should essentially be: "Where is your blog?" This should be the standard before we even consider a new entrant to the political arena.
If they can't put their thinking on the table, nor put it on the table before joining up to a particular political organisation, then we have enough reason to assume that they are (or will be) nothing more than a career politician, or worse [worse = utopian zealot operating on ulterior motives].
If people are in politics for the right reasons, then they should have no difficulty providing open content over the internet in time, like I have done. Any prospective politician who joins up with a political party without first having a good number of well-considered and independently derived views can and will almost certainly, at base, only be a political party hack.
I don't mean to appear contemptuous towards professionals like this, but they belong in the public service - not parliament. If they are only going to do as they are told, rather than provide a serious contribution, then again they might as well bypass parliament altogether and take a job within the public service.