Breath-testing politicians
"If our politicians are drunk on the job, we've a right to know." An editorial in the Australian Daily Telegraph calls for new rules to "Breath test this mob" before votes in the House. Many workers in Australia, and in the UK for that matter, are already subject to random testing for drugs and alcohol. Rail workers and air crew are required to take tests to ensure the safety of the travelling public. Even the general motoring public in Britain now faces the possibility of in . New South Wales Green Party MP John Kaye says, 'If you are going to have breathalysers for people driving cranes you should have breathalysers for people writing laws.' The call for breath-testing kits to be brought into the Australian assemblies comes after , including anti-social behaviour by politicians.
Given the current non-alcohol-related unrest at Westminster, it's unlikely that the Serjeant at Arms with be suggesting that the UK Parliament move to a random testing model, even though there have been some cases where a member of the House would have clearly failed the test. From what we can tell, such a test would have practically silenced Winston Churchill and denied us some of the greatest moments of oratory in the history of British politics. And let's not forget the late Alan Clarke's inebriated performance from the government front bench which provoked a point of order from Claire Short.
People will . But why stop at politicians? There are many jobs that carry with them significant responsibilities. Some would say there is no greater responsibility than the pastoral care of souls. Should congregations have the right to breathalyse their priest or minister if their sermons start to ramble a bit? Or if a bishop ?
Comments Post your comment