I don't see why there can't be a law that says if a government refuses to fulfill its election promises this ought to be grounds for a non-confidence motion.
What's so hard to figure out?
If circumstances make some things impossible, maybe we could cut them some slack, but the outright reversal and refusal to consider actually doing the thing you were elected for having promised to do ought to be grounds for dismissal.
If I were hiring someone and he agreed to perform particular tasks for a wage and when he showed up to work on the first day and announced he would not be doing the things agreed upon, why shouldn't I sack him?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Before posting, please see the commbox rules posted to the sidebar to the left. Comments that are rude, boring or stupid, anonymous comments or comments by persons with obvious pseudonyms or no names will be automatically deleted.
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.