|
||
 |
||
|
The Prime Minister is questioned on the issues of the day, making sense only to
himself. |
The Prime Minister is questioned on the issues of the day, making sense only to
himself.
Thank You, Prime Minister
by John Kiley
Scene:
Television Studio
Characters:
Prime Minister
Interviewer
Interviewer: Thank you Prime Minister for agreeing to
this interview.
PM: You’re welcome.
Interviewer: I
want to start with the recent publicity over an apparent division within your
cabinet and caucus. Your finance minister hinted that large income tax
increases across the board could be expected in the upcoming budget. On the
other hand her associate minister strongly denies such suggestions. We’ve talked
to several of your cabinet and caucus colleagues and there appears to be bitter
internal debate on this issue. What is your position?
PM: My position is
that caucus is united on this and all other matters and any talk of division is
mischievous rumour spread by our political opponents.
Interviewer: There is no division within your party over
tax increases?
PM: None whatever.
Interviewer: Thank you for clearing that up but it......
PM: You’re
welcome.
Interviewer: .....but it still
leaves unanswered the question of whether or not there will be tax increases.
PM: (After hesitation) Are
you asking me to answer the unasked question?
Interviewer: The unanswered question.
PM: (Pause) What was
it?
Interviewer Whether
or not there will be tax increases.
PM: We
haven’t finished debating it yet.
Interviewer: So there is division over it?
PM: Division,
no. Debate, yes.
Interviewer: The distinction is rather subtle.
PM: Yes
– very subtle.
(Thoughtful pause)
Interviewer: Turning
to international matters, New Zealand was recently embarrassed at the United
Nations when our representative declared support for an organisation which
later turned out to be a funding body for a known terrorist group. How could
this possibly have happened and what is being done by way of damage control?
PM: There
are two questions there.
Interviewer: They can be answered as one. Any
explanation of the cause of the error would go some way towards limiting the
damage.
PM: I
will answer them as two. Two, there is no need for any damage control strategy
as there is no damage. And one, it happened because the organisation in
question claimed to be a bonny fiddy humanitarian support group and we had no
reason to doubt their sincerity.
Interviewer: I find that a little unconvincing but thank
you anyway.
PM: You’re
welcome.
Interviewer: Now, regarding the incident where the
deputy Prime Minister has been charged with dangerous driving causing death and
is awaiting trial – are you planning to ask him to stand down pending the
outcome of proceedings?
PM: I
will be asking him to. Whether he does or not is entirely up to him.
Interviewer: But
surely it is your decision, or the caucus as a whole?
PM: The
minister has promised he will review his options, present his side of the story
to a full caucus meeting and then report to me again. I will then exercise my
right to make a final decision regarding his future. Remember he has pleaded
not guilty.
Interviewer: According to media reports he was seen
driving erratically and at one point was reversing on the wrong side of the
road. The accident occurred when he reversed at 30k through a red light and hit
a pedestrian. The case against him appears compelling.
PM: Well
I’m not compelled. He needs to be heard on the matter.
Interviewer: The event occurred several weeks ago. You
sit next to each other in the house and at caucus meetings. Have you not spoken
to him about it?
PM: We
don’t speak much. I don’t think he likes me. I don’t really want to talk about
this incident. It’s before the courts, it’s highly embarrassing for the
government and it’s stopping me from sleeping, especially at night.
Interviewer: I do have just one more question relating
to it. If he’s found guilty will you be relieving him of his duties as
associate transport minister with specific responsibility for road safety?
PM: If
he’s found guilty and sentenced to a prison term, most definitely.
Interviewer: Thank you.
PM: You’re
welcome.
Interviewer: Finally I want to touch just briefly on the
election scheduled for later in the year. The budget about to be presented is
the last before that election so no doubt there will be some vote-catching goodies
on offer. What can you..........
PM: If
you mean election bribes, there will be no such thing.
Interviewer: Well thank you for that reassurance but I’m ......
PM: You’re
welcome.
Interviewer: ...but I’m keen to hear what your election
strategy is likely to be, remembering that the last budget hit everybody in the
pocket so hard and was received with such venom that all commentators were
predicting your party would be tossed unceremoniously out of office at the
first opportunity.
PM: You
said you would only touch briefly on this subject.
Interviewer: I’m asking for an indication of your
election strategy.
PM: We
will be promising that things will get better.
Interviewer: Things have been getting steadily worse
since you assumed power. If you promise they will get better nobody is going to
believe you.
PM: Is
that a question?
Interviewer: It’s
an invitation for you to be more specific regarding your election campaign
strategy. (pause)
You have to face it Prime Minister, voters know that your deputy is facing a
jail term, your UN ambassador is an international laughing stock, and you are perceived
to be at loggerheads with your finance minister. Opinion polls put your party
below the margin of error. Do you seriously see any chance whatever of being
re-elected?
PM: (sighs wearily) You
just don’t understand politics do you.
Interviewer: What
do you mean?
PM: (another deep sigh) Our
political system has a proud history going back to the British Reformation in 1832
and has stood the....
Interviewer: Reform Bill.
PM: ... and has stood
the test of time since then and do you know why? Because it
is controlled by the people. They decide what they want and what they
don’t want. They put parties in and
out of office. But it goes much further. They also decide policy. If the people
want major changes to the health or education system, governments implement
those changes. If they want less money spent on the military, less money is
spent on the military. Roading policy? Don’t ask the
minister of transport. Ask the motorist. As for financial matters which you
seem to be obsessed with, no voter would ever suggest that income tax be
abolished – they know that without it government services would collapse. They
wouldn’t even call for tax reductions. But their voices are heard loud and
clear when the question arises of how tax money should be apportioned – and we
listen. Politicians understand this. As long as people feel they wield the
power they will fall over backwards to please the entity that gave them that
power. We, and by we I mean western governments, could retain the power for
ourselves but we give it away to the people. They recognise that and are
forever grateful. That’s why nobody has any reason to dislike or distrust a
government, ever!!
(Long pause. Interviewer is open mouthed in astonishment)
Interviewer: Everything you’ve just said – and I mean everything, is utter rubbish.
PM: Of
course it is. But (leans forward earnestly)
people believe it. (Nods firmly and sits back smugly)
Interviewer: Thank
you Prime Minister.
PM: You’re
welcome.