Each elected member of a parliament is there to represent the interests of his electorate.
He is paid for by the people.
He is an employee of the people.
He needs to listen to his electorate, and do his best to represent its views.
He is indeed the eyes, ears, and voice of his electorate, in a parliamentary sense.
He should keep his electorate informed of changes to laws and other significant matters.
However, neither individual members, nor the government as a whole, should become emotionally involved with the people.
As a doctor would do, they should remain detached, and not let emotion be part of any decision making.
As a doctor would do, they should respond quickly to difficulties in a positive way.
They should move quickly to change laws or procedures, as and when a person or group is being treated unfairly.
As would be a doctor’s approach, they also will not allow personal religious attitudes to enter in to any assessment they make.
Religion must remain outside parliamentary deliberation and decision making.
Church and state must be kept completely separate, especially at this time in our history.
If leadership is needed, parliament should lead by example.
(did I hear someone smiling?)
But, like a doctor, at no time should members of parliament become emotionally involved with the adversities with which they deal.
Jacinda Ardern appeared to become emotionally involved with a religious group, after some of its members were attacked by a person lacking self control.
I reason that that was entirely the wrong approach for Jacinda to take.
In my assessment, it showed very poor leadership.
I see she was criticised by Alan Jones for recent statements she allegedly made about climate change.
Whilst I don’t want to enter in to discussion about the rights or wrongs of any statement she did make, I do think that it might be wise for her to stop and think far more deeply before she speaks or acts.
I am sure her heart is in the right place.
Now all we need is for her thoughts to come up to speed.