POLITICIANS, MORALITY AND ETHICS
You think the recent rorting of expenses by our politicians
is wrong? The rest of us pay our own way to go to the wedding of a friend or
colleague. We believe therefore,
that politicians, – not the taxpayer - should pay their own expenses when they are invited
to a wedding You also believe that the Prime Minister of this country, Tony
Abbott, is wrong when he refuses to take
action on the West Australian member Don
Randall, who has chalked up in more than
$10,00 in questionable
travel and expenses? Or that the
Prime Minister should question his own refusal to pay back the expense of attending
an Ironman event ?
If your children attend an ethics class at any of Sydney‘s
public schools they would agree with the Prime Minister. They will have learned
that ethical decisions are a matter of discussion, even argument. This will be
the method they will have been shown for reaching an ethical conclusion. They
will have had much practice. They will possibly have also learned that argument
and discussion in reaching moral decisions have been the method taught not only
at schools but in our universities and colleges. A method that has existed
since time immemorial. There are no hard
and fast rules on what is the right thing to do; only competing theories. If
Tony Abbott wants to justify his position in not taking himself to task for
unethical behaviour , or any of his ministers, he will find a supporting arguments in some of the Kantian theory, in
one of a half dozen utilitarian theories ,
or in virtue theory. After all, it is a virtuous act for a politician to
interact with the people in an Ironman series, and therefore fully justifiable
that the people should pay for this or any other political rort.
Our children and our politicians, would make a better world,
as we all would, if we all applied some empirical observation and practical
common sense to documenting what we regard as right, and what
we regard as wrong. In short, an enforceable code of ethical behaviour for
political life.