Reactive policy

What spooks me most about politics is what might be generally called reactive policy. That is, a party that has no particular policy but rather seeks to determine public opinion and responds mainly or only to that. Prime Minister Howard is a master of this. But he is certainly not the only one. The worst example of this is pandering to the electorate's sense of xenophobia, and thus setting up an auction with the Opposition about which party can terrify the electorate the most about the presence of non-native born Australians in our midst.

What I want is not reactive policy, but proactive policy. Visionary stuff! Where our leaders offer us some sense of vision instead of pandering to what will get them elected. I doubt that we will ever see this again.

What is even worse is reactive opposition. Where Opposition's are told by their advisers to distinguish themselves from the government in order that choice might be able to be made, when people go to the polls.
It doesn't seem to matter much what the truth of the matter is, as long as a choice can be made!
So we see that now the South Australian Opposition is against trams. Now, I am not particularly in favour of what seems to be a bizarre waste of money (albeit an interesting tourist diversion), but surely there are better things to spend your money on from the government's point of view, and more important things to address:

• the state of roads
• the education system
• the health system
• · and so on!

To be fair to my local Liberal member, and now Deputy Leader, that is what he seems to be saying. It is, though, totally reactive. But where is the vision?