By Dan McCurry
We got it wrong; we got ourselves born into a humble home and then when we grew up we entered the caring professions or public service. Now we’re mature and looking at a career in politics and we realise that we’d never be in a position to waive ministerial salaries. This proves that David Cameron’s Conservatives are far nobler, more committed and more caring than us.
Why didn’t we have the foresight? Why is that we consider a politician’s salary as being an income when we could have considered it as rations? We simply didn’t follow those opportunities. We could have made money, but were distracted by the need to patch people up in hospitals, to educate children in deprived places and to intervene in a potentially tragic family situation that will be appreciated by no one except for the abused child in later life.
What kind of a preparation for political life is this, when everyone knows that the Tories are so much more committed to the country that they’re willing to take pay cuts to prove it? I blame the Labour Party. I blame the selections; the questions and constant probing that tend to mistrust and weed out those who have organised themselves well enough to have excessive financial security while promoting those who think £65k to be a fairly good income. If the party had a little more foresight, they’d realise that the time to waive salaries is after you’ve become a politician, so that everyone can see what you’ve done, not before the political career when nobody knows who you are.
We need to reform the Labour Party. We need to learn from the Tories.
More from LabourList
Local government reforms: ‘Bigger authorities aren’t always better, for voters or for Labour’s chances’
Compass’ Neal Lawson claims 17-month probe found him ‘not guilty’ over tweet
John Prescott’s forgotten legacy, from the climate to the devolution agenda