Is it naïve to think of a promise in the political context as no more than intention to do something based on current conditions.
Am I a bit thick to think that such a promise is essentially a judgement of what a group of people who share an ideological view of the world think is in the best economic, social or political interests of a constituency based on prevailing economic, social and political conditions.
Am I being unreasonable to think that as the future unfolds and global policies like Trumpism turn the world order and economic conditions on their head and impact on us, a campaign promise may not be judged to be in our best interests and change may be necessary.
Ms Hanson and Mr Joyce, judging from their reaction to the recent government budget (in One Nation’s ‘Fire the Liar’ campaign) would undoubtedly agree that I am naive. Forget policy, it is obvious that they see that the Chicken Little view of the world and ‘broken promises’ is the best way to the minds of the electorate and their political ambitions.
Remember? Henny Penny hit on the head by an acorn thinks the world is ending, the sky is falling in. With a group of gullible farmyard friends, Cocky-Locky, Ducky-Daddles and Turky-Lurky, who blindly agree with her, she sets off to warn the king. On the way they run into cunning Foxy-Loxy who offers to show them a short-cut. The short-cut leads the panicking animals into Foxy-Loxy’s den where they are eaten by Foxy-Loxy and his family.
Fair go, who would be a politician trying to alleviate pressures and satisfy an electorate locally? Most of the pressures emanate from local exploiters and global mayhem. A promise sacrificed today might be necessary if we are to have bread on the table in the future.
For four decades The Echo has printed the stories some people loved, some people hated, and some pretended not to read. If you want us to keep telling the truth, the real truth, not the sugar-coated version. We’ll need your support to keep the presses rolling. 
