Government strategy for crime needed

In a previous article, I sought to convey the point that there is nothing intrinsically wrong about the politicizing of crime.  The point was made that governments were invented for the realization of two basic functions on behalf of the people; that is the prevention of anarchy and the provision of good life.  That is one of the first things taught in the study of Politics and Government!
So if one party who wants to govern says that it is better able to address the crime problem, while politicizing the issue, is not doing anything wrong.  Governments must be judged on that score.  While all the citizenry suffer when anarchy abounds or the economy is not doing well, it is the job of the elected government to correct it and not the citizens or opposition parliamentarians.  The people have given up some of their rights and money to create the institution of government to pursue those mandates on their behalf and so the people expect government to deliver.
It has been announced that the King Administration will be taking a Bi-Partisan approach in its strategy to address the growing crime problem.  The government must be told that by doing this it is tacitly conceding to claims that it is clueless about dealing with the crime issue.   Bi-Partisanship has its place; but when a government is going to the opposition for ideas to fight crime which is one of the two main functions of government, it is clearly admitting to the opposition that it cannot govern.  If that is truly the case, then it should just resigns en masse and let another team do the people’s work.
We must be very careful about what we consume from the airwaves and from people that we consider to be prominent citizens—they get it wrong sometimes.  I am making reference here to the popularization of “Fighting crime is everybody’s business” and the incessant call for a bi-partisanship in the fight against crime.  Those may sound sweet to the ear but are very misleading.                  While crime affects everyone, regardless race, creed or political preference; it is the business of government and government only to solve it. They are the ones equipped with the necessary resources to do so.              The people created government because they understood that individually they would not be successful in protecting themselves from anarchy or realizing the good life.  If the government is now turning to the people, yes by going to their Representatives in Parliament you are in essence going to them, it is admitting that it cannot get it done.
I expect the government to come out with a strategy to deal with the problem.  The inputs for that strategy can come from anywhere, solicited or otherwise; but the government should not be going to the opposition to solicit ideas for that purpose.              As I have said before, bi-partisanship has its place, but when it comes to something as fundamental as this in the evaluation of an administration; it needs to stay clear of the Opposition.   At the occasion of the reckoning, the people will decide whether the government strategies worked or are workable.  If the people are satisfied then they will be reelected; otherwise they will be removed.
What is strange in this for us as a people is that we may be turning to a recently disposed administration which in nine years failed to correct with the very same problem.  What would that make us?  You know what they say about people doing the same thing twice with the expectation of a different result?
It is no doubt that the voters of this country will have a tough time deciding on a new government when Parliament is dissolved.  The LPM must be chided for not having done enough to present itself as a viable and serious alternative to the two GOPs.  The clock is ticking and the bell is in hand. On your mark, get set .