Home page A government of all the talents? If it was not for the interference of political parties, Gordon Brown's idea concerning a government of all the talents is just common sense. Most people would in fact wish to have the best combination of people possible running affairs of state so that the best decisions are made and money is not wasted. The lack of talent is evident That each British political party does not have an adequate intellectual critical mass to provide sufficient people of high calibre for managing tasks has been evident for a long time. But this lack of talent is exacerbated by the jealous quest for power by each political party. This is why the British political system is incapable of creating effective governance and it calls into question as to why we have political parties at all. The media accused Gordon Brown of trying to undermine the Liberal Democracts by offering posts to some of their number in a new government. Independence sustains talent The principled reaction to any offer by Gordon Brown by someone who is competent and independent should be, for the sake of the people of Britain, that they can serve any government under any party as long as they do not come under that party's whip. This particular point was not mentioned in the initial media comments and the reactions to Gordon Brown's ideas by the Liberal Democracts and Conservatives seemed to be somewhat cynical and unpricipled. One should also note that some Labour MPs, albeit off the record, criticised Gordon Brown's actions. But just because an MP has been elected does not qualify him or her in any way for a government role and to expect the Prime Minister to have to dredge up candidates for governemnt posts from the human resources available within the parliamentary Labour is really absurd. Tony Blair was already scraping the barrel in trying to complete reshuffles, the cupboard is really quite bare. Constrained talent There was a point in this saga where the image of Gordon Brown's sincerity seemed to be undermined by misleading revelations in the media that a condition for taking up such work was joining the Labour party. This has since been denied as having been a condition of undertaking such a service by Gordon Brown. However, such people are expected to come under the Labour whip which amounts to the same thing as being a member of the party. What is it that Gordon Brown or the Labour party is afraid of? There is no doubt that the best high calibre advice is given on a professional basis, with sincerity and remains independent. One has to ask why does this have to be channelled through or be subjected to Labour party controls when the individuals concerned developed their outlooks and their whole life experience based on an existence which was free from the collectivism of British party politics. British politicians are unlikely to understand this issue since everything they do is controlled and defined by their party. They dont even vote in line with constituency wishes but only as their whips demand. It is therefore a waste of time trying to make the case for independence to such people whose mindsets are so intellectually fettered to the collectivist attitudes and values of political parties. Party and government relevance Why does the Labour party wish to fetter its imported talent? The Labour party membership is less than 0.5% of the electorate, this is completely inexpressive. They talk about a mandate based on a manifesto and yet less than 20% of the electorate supported the government at the last general election. Under such circumstances the idea of broadening access to independent input makes a lot of sense to compensate for the lack of a legitimate mandate as measured by the electorate support. Confidence in such a move would permit intellectuially free individuals speak to power. Unfortunately it would seem that there is a fundamental lack of confidence on the part of Gordon Brown or the Labour party, or both, as reflected in this desire that any such contributions be controlled by the party machine. Cash in exchange for clonal collectivism On the other hand, one has to wonder about the motivation of what are being referred to as substantive individuals signing up to a failing political party's whip in exchange for a well-paid job in government. They are not, many might claim, selling their souls by becoming members of the party. The whip seriously compromises individual freedom of expression and therefore suppresses independence and identity. This is equivalent to and as bad as selling one's soul. Updated: 30th June 2007 - corrected with respect to false media reports stating that the condition for work with the goverment was membership of the Labour party.