- Messages
- 11,513
- Name
- Stewart
- Edit My Images
- Yes
When I started reading this, I was nodding in agreement. But I stopped nodding, and by the end I was in almost complete disagreement.These letters to politicians shows that there 'seems' to be no approved communication standards. In other words, important issues cannot be kicked around until somebody dies. Only a technical person, not a politician can decide if there is a danger of death. Money does not come into it. Before they can issue a danger of death notice, the technical experts must have the facts on hand that fit exacting technical criteria. Once danger of death notices have been given, politicians legally have to respond. They are now responsible. This gives them the ammunition they need to make all necessary changes. They should not be in a position to postpone it. They mustn't be allowed to prioritise. They can't choose who lives and who dies.
Money does come into it. Money always comes into it. It has to. There is a "danger of death" in almost everything we do. Walking down stairs. Using electrical apparatus. Driving cars, or walking along streets where cars are being driven. Taking medicines. It impossible to avoid danger of death. So what we as a society do is try to manage the risk down to the point where it is widely judged to be acceptable. We pay professionals to do those cost/benefit calculations and we elect politicians to oversee the whole thing and to decide what is worth spending our money on and what isn't. If the politicians make decisions which we, as a society, think are wrong then we can sack them and elect some different ones. That's how it works.
I have some sympathy with your view that the communications channels seem to be rather imprecise for such important issues. Perhaps we would benefit from an improved system whereby politicians can be "officially" advised of a hazard that needs investigation and prioritisation, or at least an "official" response. But perhaps not. Just as we expect our politicians to spend some of our money wisely on our behalf, so I think we have a responsibility to use our politicians' limited resources of time and attention wisely. A system that allowed some interest groups to "officially" shout louder and demand that their concerns be addressed might not be in the best overall interests of society.