![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Davids' theory of political half-life.
Sep. 28th, 2009 10:45 amI have a half-formed theory of political half-life, which states that the half-life of a government is about 3 years. When first elected, a government puts all its best talents into place in ministerial roles. From there, natural attrition from scandals, human failings and retirements mean that the quality of people in those roles will decline in a steady fashion thereafter, halving approximately every three years.
This problem is compounded by the lack of new talent which rises whilst a party is in power, as sitting MPs rarely leave voluntarily to make room for new blood. As an incumbent government loses overall seats over time, new talent can only enter an existing party when it is out of power and gaining seats from a low start.
As such, a party which has been in power for 12 years will have only 1/16 of the talent in managerial positions than it did in its first year of office, and the only way to change that is losing an election to clear out old MPs from either seat losses or natural wastage.
Thoughts?
This problem is compounded by the lack of new talent which rises whilst a party is in power, as sitting MPs rarely leave voluntarily to make room for new blood. As an incumbent government loses overall seats over time, new talent can only enter an existing party when it is out of power and gaining seats from a low start.
As such, a party which has been in power for 12 years will have only 1/16 of the talent in managerial positions than it did in its first year of office, and the only way to change that is losing an election to clear out old MPs from either seat losses or natural wastage.
Thoughts?
