“Decisions Delicious Decisions” - 24 January 2010

In a much earlier life I worked as a sales representative for Terry's of York. One of the advertising slogans for our luxurious highly priced box of chocolates was "Decisions Delicious Decisions". The idea was that when confronted with this box of tasty treats every decision would be delicious.

I do not feel the same about the phoney election campaign so far. I suppose that I am a floating voter with an inclination to one of the major parties. My problem is that I can't wholeheartedly offer my support to any of them. Just as I think I might have settled on a particular party - wham - they announce something which I believe to be folly and ill thought out. Like most members of the public I suppose I wish we could operate a kind of pick and mix, taking the things we agree with and pop them as policy to a party we can fully support. We cant.

The idea that the electorate can be socially engineered into accepting marriage as a lifestyle choice with the offer of a few pounds is laughable. As if people who fall out of love, or discover that they have been cheated on, or fall in love and don't want to marry, or fall in love with someone of the same sex will marry because the tax system offers a few extra pounds is, frankly, off the wall. It is simply another indication that some politicians live in a different world. The policy we are told is to ensure that children benefit. Parents who stick together for the sake of the children normally discover that such an action ensures that the children suffer. The policy is also insulting to those who are widowed or who for a variety of reasons find themselves as single parents through no fault of their own - are we really saying that they are second class citizens? Of course the family is an important unit to our society, but a few extra pounds will not keep them together.

I am not a great believer in banning things. In a democracy we boast that we have freedom of speech to voice whatever we like. It now appears that some political parties believe in freedom of speech provided they agree with the party's policies. Of course there has to be protections from incitement to terrorism, or from preaching hatred, but either we have a democracy where people are free to exercise freedom of speech or we don't. Do politicians really believe that putting up the tax on alcohol is going to prevent youngsters getting drunk at the weekends? Do they really believe that banning groups or the wearing of garments really enhances the liberties and freedoms of all people?

I am not sure that any of the parties have the right leader. They are either seen as being implicated in past failures, or have knee-jerk reactions and formulate policy on the hoof, or as being too smug dictatorial and not living in the same world that the rest of us inhabit, or are not known or only interested in policies which they can adopt because they will never have the chance to implement them.

I therefore find myself not only with a mount of decisions to make non of them being delicious. Perhaps I find myself in the same position as Forrest Gump. You may remember that his mother said "Life was like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're gonna get." The reason I say that is because I am not sure that I believe any of them.

This leaves us in a difficult position because the majority may do what they always do and fail engage themselves in political debate and that will be a great loss to our nation, our freedoms and our democracy.