Are the poor the most qualified to represent their interests within the policymaking process?

The answer to this question must be a categorical yes. Of course, the obstruction to the poor being in the best position to represent their interests is the fact that poverty imposes its own barriers. When people's day-to-lives are a grinding struggle to make ends meet, simply finding the means to keep a roof overhead and provide food, clothing, warmth and medicinal care for families, is all-consuming. The practicalities of participating in any policymaking process may seem worthy enough but will never loom high on priorities. This is the very reason why the poor are exactly who should be featured most centrally if any political process will ever successfully champion their interests.

In western Europe, neoliberal political ideologies emanate from a solipsistic viewpoint. The UK Conservative politician, Margaret Thatcher (Prime Minister from 1979 to 1990) was so focussed on people being free from state interference and encouraged to stand on their own feet that she famously stated "there's no such thing as society." Her sweeping ideology only proved to be incredibly divisive, as for every person who managed to escape inner city poverty, as many found impediments everywhere they turned, whether prospective employers disliked their regional accents, or people were obliged to take whatever menial jobs they could to make ends meet rather than embarking on ambitious business enterprises.

In short, only those with direct experience of poverty can possibly be best qualified to explain their predicament and future aspirations to any gathering involving more comfortably-off but wellmeaning individuals who might be seeking to explore remedies.