I want to start a new political party.

I don't know whether to call it The Common Sense Party or None of the Above (on the grounds that most of my members would be people who wanted to vote for none of the above) Its manifesto is easy; Whatever you want to do you have to ask yourself "Is it sensible?" and then, if it is, you might as well do it.
It already has a set of policies in early formulation, amongst them education, economics and environment. And it has an easy set of criterion for its candidates; if you apply to be a candidate you can't be one, since the fact that you seek power means you are unsuited to have power. (That's based on Douglas Adams' idea that the man in charge of the universe doesn't want to be and would much rather watch cricket, but since he wants the job least, it's his)
In Education, the policy is early intervention... preferably before birth, with an emphasis on encouraging people to achieve maturity themselves and to establish a stable relationship before even contemplating taking on the responsibility of a child. I'd love to give tax breaks to encourage a fixed commitment like marriage, since research suggests that children who live in a stable, two parent family are more likely to achieve and less likely to be a burden through benefits or cost of crime. Parents will also have the option to attend parenting classes and groups throughout their childrens lives, although those at risk will be told they have to attend as part of their rights and responsibilities charter. Children will have nursery and school places allocated to them on a closest to home approach, so that they can all walk to school, while class sizes will be small... 20 in Key stage 1 and 2, with a good sprinkling of assistants as well.
In economics, everyone will be encouraged to follow Mr Micawber's advice and to keep their expenditure in line with their income. They will be encouraged to seek out the best value items that they want and to recognise that the most expensive is not necessarily the best. This goes for the country, too. Not spending more than we make and getting full value from our benefits system by making a degree of voluntary work compulsory for those claiming benefits who were capable of something would mean that we got full value from our money. Benefits would be drastically reduced so that noone should make more from being unemployed than a worker in the lowest paid job gets. Also, there would be a cap on the number of children funded so that, for example, a family with three kids would get the same money as a family with seven kids, the idea being that if they truly want seven children they will support the extras somehow, or realise that there was a very good reason for the introduction of birth control and the demise of big families. Of course, families not on benefits who want and can afford seven children can have them, as long as they promise not to complain because they can never get into anywhere on a family ticket. These would be made into two adults and three children by law, because having to pay for the extra one is so annoying.
Also, criminals would be made to pay for their crimes quite literally, so that a vandal would have to pay for their destruction, and a fraudster would need to replace their takings. Also, prison time could be charged for, so that if the prisoner paid a supplement they could have greater facilities or a better class of toilet roll. No pay, no pee, methinks.
In the environment, everyone would be encouraged to think things through, and apply the three R's to life; reduce, reuse, recycle. Although car use wouldn't be banned, ways to rethink it would be, perhaps with a greater emphasis on running cars on boiling water. That way, you could get to where you wanted and have a cup of tea when you got there. Holidays abroad would be rationed, and allocated on a 'needs a break' prescription off the doctor and time in the countryside encouraged. Work hours would be kept short and stress management introduced so that workers wouldn't need to have long breaks. Besides, all workers would be encouraged to work school hours and to have afternoon tea. As a nation, we never did the long lunchtime because we did the afternoon tea, and I think we should reintroduce this as a stress relieving measure.
Elevators would be made into gyroscopicallyoperated dynamos, so that they use no electricity to run and actually generate power for the window displays which would all have to have motion detectors. And use of the stairs for all multilevel taskings of one interim stage or less would be made compulsory.... in other words, if you only need to go down one, use the stairs. All new buildings would have to be three floors or more, with a return to Victorian standards on houses... or was it Georgian, I can never remember.
That's enough for now. I have to go and decide where I stand on cone abuse, there are too many on our roads, oh, and also whether I can have a colour that won't offend anyone. I think I'll have to take my cue from the Olympics & use five different colours. Or perhaps I can go for an absence of hype and stick with white. Then I can use the slogan, "The Common Sense Party, It's the White way to go."
What do you think? Good idea?

*Added later* Which just goes to show, I should think before I speak. I mean no disrespect to any one of any colour, race or creed when I use the colour white, I wanted, rather to have no colour, a shade beyond colour that couldn't have any negative conurtations or dislikability. So, in retrospect, no, not white. Perhaps a fluorescent green? Or that wonderful neon pink that has, surprisingly, never been adopted by any political party. Or infra red? Although the party badges and leaflets would be difficult to produce. Perhaps I could use invisible ink, since if you have to ask the policies, you won't want to vote?

Comments

  1. Here here! If you create such a society can I come and live there?
    Mary
    PS Watch you don't get leg cramps from that soap box :))

    ReplyDelete
  2. You had me right up until the 'no pay, no pee' bit, which strikes me as unworkable!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm with you and often vote for “None of the Above”. You have all my votes, that's me, the husband, the two kids and the dog. The "Is it sensible?" chant will go out across the nation.

    The three children limit for government hand outs is a must, I agree with you that if you want more you must self fund.

    A re-introduction of the “tea lady” would encourage the afternoon break and aid employment for the aged.

    The "white" theme isn't really very environmentally friendly and could also attract some unwanted racist taunts. I think your colour should be unbleached beige, you’ll keep the greenies, the elderly and all races happy.

    Now were can I make my tax deductable donation?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hurrah! I completely agree with you and if you need a policy-advisor, I'm yours (not wanting to be a politician - just wanting to make the country better) but perhaps the slogan may need a wee bit of working on!

    Anywho keep it up, it sounds wonderful!

    ReplyDelete
  5. We could use this politcal party over here in the states, too. I see and hear of so much wasteful spending by the government that it makes my teeth ache from grinding them all the time! And don't even get me started on people having kids when they can't even take care of themselves! MAKES ME CRAZY!

    (Deep breath, deep breath...think about Christmas, Kari. Just think about Christmas) lol

    ReplyDelete
  6. Erm..... No comment! Bring back afternoon tea though but would coffee be banned?

    ReplyDelete
  7. So, when are you up for the local council? All sounds, well, sensible to me!

    ReplyDelete
  8. I've never wanted to join any political party but this one, now I could be tempted. There's a distinct lack of commonsense in the political world at times, they just don't seem to understand or listen to the opinions of the vast majority of this country. Most of us do have intelligence and common sense and as always the minority spolit it for everyone else.
    Compulsory voluntary work...just what I've often thought, why are we paying quite capable people to do nothing? And yes yes yes to the cap on support for larger families, it makes my blood boil to read about huge families with kids from different fathers, producing more children even while claiming benefits!!!Arggghh...why is my money being used to support these people? I don't care how many children they choose to have but they're not my responsibility. Of course we have to support vulnerable families but there are far too many milking the system. And why should anyone be worse off working than claiming benefits? It's wrong.
    Jo for Prime Minister, yay!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thanks for stopping by! I love reading your comments.

Popular Posts