Motion: THB that people should be given more responsibility for their LOT
Role: Rep. (govt.)
Date: Apr 8th, 2015
Dear Assemblage, Chair, Ladies & Gentlemen,
I’d like to speak for the motion THB that people should be given more responsibility for their LOT as the govt MP and 3rd speaker on behalf of my side. I think that there is too much patronising and condescension in this country. It is detrimental in many ways, and I’m willing to try and clarify here why it is so bad, in addition to the reasons and viewpoints that the earlier govt speakers have put forward.
Patronising has a long history in this country. A basic form and shape of it is a situation where 10 % of the population is suffering from something, is being guilty of something or is falling victim to something. What happens THEN is that 100 % of the population is subjected to legislation that tries to right this minor wrong that is occurring, turning it into a major source of grievance and upset.
The Nanny State means that an area of Life is taken over by the govt, who think they are doing a better job policing people than what people would do on their own. However, the invisible pre-emptive factor is that usually there is a counterforce taking shape and place in opposition to the govt’s efforts and measures. I’ll give examples of this.
■ In loosely populated drive-thru communities in Finland, it’s indeed customary that the speed limit gets lowered to 60 km/hour for the duration of 30 seconds and a distance of maybe 1 km when a car is passing through a ”hamlet” of sorts, a sparsely populated community somewhere along a main road such as the E4. This happens in order to prevent traffic casualties from happening. If the drivers do not comply with the request, a camera will accompany the traffic sign and provide an image of speeding car so as the have a ticket worth about €100 sent to the culprit at home. Meanwhile, parents in the area are well aware of the drivethru traffic, telling their kids ot stay the hell out of the main road by day and night at all costs. In consequence, the policy does not save any lives but taxes the transit traffic heavily.
■ Another example is the sanding of sidewalks and roads during the winter. Sand is used to prevent as many knee and ankle and sole injuries as possible among the elderly and the population who are moving about in an awkward and assisted way. For all that, these people are already receiving meals to their homes, using tax cabs for free at the expense of society and taxpayers and generally staying at home as much as possible for the fear of slipping on a street. As a consequence, at any rate, a massive oversanding of roads results in breathing problems for the asthmatic, bicycles problems for the pedalling agile and a general sense of dustiness and ragged, ugly sights. Also, dog owners have to walk their pets over gravelly, sandy roads with sand sticking to the paws of the dogs and hurting them. This hurts the tourism industry, as well, as most tourists want to experience a ”Winter Wonderland” when they arrive in Finland. What they get instead is not a snow-covered Finland but a sand-covered one. As if Arabian dunes had anything to do with Finnish snow dunes. That is one bad example of image-building gone wrong.
■ The third example is toilets for the disabled. These are ubiquitous. You can see them in malls, restaurants, at department stores, schools, polytechnics, universities and service stations. Who does frequent the inva-WC? Usually someone who is not invalid at all. An expectant mother, an inveterate bachelor or an acne-riddled teenager. Nowhere to be seen are those to whom the toilet was originally aimed. Presumably, they are staying at home for the same reasons as people mentioned on the former issue. In any event, the intention of the WC is not fulfilled, as it becomes a playground for all and sundry people who want to have an extra WC. The nanny state has again delivered…
What I’m trying to say is that every time the govt tries to save or serve 100 % of people by some daft measure, the 10 % whom the measure targets are already taking care of their own needs and the problem they are afflicted with in their own personal way. The govt thinks people are always so dumb that they cannot look after themselves, but that is a crass underestimation. If people were really so dumb as the authorities think, they would not be fit enough to produce and pay taxes, something the govt is deeply reliant upon. Our govt can’t afford to be as smug as it attempts to be at times/all the time.
I give 2 solutions to the govt:
a) Stop nannying the State altogether and let the bad things happen on their own weight
b) Target the aim precisely and appropriately.
That is the most and the least that you can do — simultaneously.
Puheen kesto: 7 min 2 sek
Arvio: * * * * ½. Puhe menee annetun puheajan maksimiin asti eikä näin ollen tarjoa paljoakaan iloa ”keskeyttelijöille”. Siitä huolimatta se saattaa miellyttää kuulijaa johdonmukaisuudellaan ja tosielämän esimerkeillään. Ongelmana on ehkä se, että annetut esimerkit ovat ”liian arkisia” ollakseen vaikuttavia, mutta ainakin ne löytyvät läheltä. Joku toinen voisi keksiä erisisältöiset kolme esimerkkiä puheen ytimeen vaihtamatta silti omassa puheessaan otsikkoa, roolia, runkoa tai teemaa.