Jump to content

The Conservative Party - Part Two.

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, sibon said:

I think that the cabinet "second job" thing is just a  distraction from the substantive issue.

 

 I had a "second job" and sometimes a third one whilst I was working. They were all paid for from the same source and I was accountable to the same people for both jobs. That's the key thing. 

MPs work for and represent constituencies while ministers work for and represent the Government. Sometimes that is a conflict of interest sometimes it is not. Certainly ministers are expected to vote with the Government to the extent that voting against the Government is generally shortly followed or preceded by resignation.

 

Perhaps you mis-spoke but it is worth noting that Government jobs considerably outnumber the cabinet ... I seem to remember that in the region of 140 MPs also hold government jobs. Here is a list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government_ministers_of_the_United_Kingdom .

 

Any way, much as I dislike it I have no proposal for a fix. Certainly not since the US, which does effectively separate the legislative and executive branches of government, showed the possibility of electing a lying, narcissistic moron as head of the executive was plausible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sibon said:

 

What we actually need are professional politicians, in the sense that whilst they are MPs , thats what they are focusing on. Having a variety of people, from a variety of backgrounds is clearly desirable, but they should park their professions upon entering parliament. 

 

If we are going to reform stuff, let's reform the lot. No more second jobs. Give them proper research and clerical support from professional researchers and clerical workers. No more employing family members in posts that they are not qualified to do. I'm looking at you, Nadine Dorries.

 

Let's make MPs employees, with five year contracts, a proper code of conduct, proper disciplinary procedures and proper legal responsibilities. Then let's all expect better from them.

 

£80k should be a good enough salary to attract good people to be mps, whilst also discouraging those who only seek to enrich themselves.

But, in the main, we're getting either ex-lawyers, ex-business/PR types or those who have been involved in politics since leaving uni (via the "right" school of course). How are any of these going to know what's it's like to run out of money before the end of the month, or  just to get their kids into a decent state school or even a Dr's appointment?

 

Yes there are exceptions where people have built a career in something worthwhile but they're thin on the ground.

1 hour ago, Delbow said:

I'd like to hear an objective explanation of why Nadia Whittome, who only keeps £35k of her annual salary, is a less effective MP than one who doubles their full salary from a second job.

If they're earning more than £80k not being an MP, being an MP is the second, less important job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nightrider said:

80k isn't low pay. And if someone thinks it is perhaps they are not going into politics for the right reasons. If you just want to be stinking rich go and do something else. 

As much as it might grate with some, £80k isn't a large salary in 2021. Sorry to bring the bad news.

 

Not only that but sources of income are very diverse and some jobs aren't paid at all. Whether it's sitting on a charity board, looking after an NHS Trust, representing union workers or industry... the list goes on of perfectly respectable roles that you might not agree with en-masse but I'd hope you would agree are representative of our nation and should have representation of their interests inside Parliament where laws that affect them are made.

 

Life isn't full of clean edges so if we restrict MPs to only having an MPs job we end up back with political cranks and the idle rich taking up the job of representing you and I locally, nationally and on the world stage. Personally speaking, I'd like a wider range of people who are more rounded than that. 

 

Think on this - would you like every British politician to be like Julie Dore or would you prefer to have a range of people with different ideas, experience and day-to-day interests?

 

 

 

* I'm not picking on Julie, she's a good working example because she was a hard worker, local, people know who she is and she only had one job while leading Sheffield Council.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, tinfoilhat said:

You'll be no good as an MP then.

But that's we've got now. Professional politicians who then get second jobs when they can use their political connections.

It's a fair point but really, do we care and if we do care does it make any difference to how the country is run? We do need to be grown up about how the world works and politicians inhabit the same world that we do. They have no prior claim to probity before us.

 

I remember a meeting in the HoLs with an opposition peer who was only really interested in how I should fill my boots, and maybe his, through the thing I was there to talk about.  As it happened I wasn't really there for that so my integrity didn't take it further. I've had many more meetings where MPs and peers were interested, motivated and keen to assist on topics that were far outside their own sphere of interest and followed up as they promised. Some of those could very easily have leveraged their position for financial gain but didn't 

 

Perhaps we shouldn't automatically assume that everyone else has our own morals. ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tony said:

This, of course, is still nonsense on stilts, appealing only to emotions, particularly jealousy. Outputs are what matters because that is what we appoint MPs for, not for any moralistic determination on them as people because that can only ever be a subjective approach. The questions I posed still stand. 

People vote for a variety of reasons - mostly it's based on party lines, or will be "what they can do for me", or "what will they do for the country / society in general."  Some voters do have an affiliation with their local MP, from which ever party, because they're visible and do a good job. Some people do vote on emotions, don't down play it! Look at how the Brexit campaign ran, and what was the motivating factor behind many people's votes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that politicians should  come from all sectors of society, but do they?

Angela Raynor's background is unusual even in the Labour party, and as far as l know, she has no equivalent in the Tory party.

But l do  believe an MP's job should be full time if they're to do it properly. However, if they have time on their hands, l also think it would be useful for them to do (or shadow) a public sector worker's job to find out from personal experience what these jobs involve, and what these jobs are worth. 

If anybody saw Ed Balls on TV last night  working in a care home, you'll get the idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Anna B said:

I agree that politicians should  come from all sectors of society, but do they?

Angela Raynor's background is unusual even in the Labour party, and as far as l know, she has no equivalent in the Tory party.

But l do  believe an MP's job should be full time if they're to do it properly. However, if they have time on their hands, l also think it would be useful for them to do (or shadow) a public sector worker's job to find out from personal experience what these jobs involve, and what these jobs are worth. 

If anybody saw Ed Balls on TV last night  working in a care home, you'll get the idea.

Angies background is unusual but she soon learned how to put her nose in the trough . See post 3268 . Ed balls is just trying to get a tv career 

Edited by hackey lad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hackey lad said:

Angies background is unusual but she soon learned how to put her nose in the trough . See post 3268 . Ed balls is just trying to get a tv career 

But he's not even an MP now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Anna B said:

But l do  believe an MP's job should be full time if they're to do it properly. However, if they have time on their hands, l also think it would be useful for them to do (or shadow) a public sector worker's job to find out from personal experience what these jobs involve, and what these jobs are worth.

Their work in the constituencies is done by staff and down at Westminster they can be paired with an opposition member, so there is no need to vote.

There are a lot of other things that they can do, but seldom dont.

Various MPs have had babies or been ill, no one misses them. Have we got any problems in society that needs the attention of our MPs, of course we have, but the ruling party do not care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

But he's not even an MP now?

Angie Rayner but you knew that 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

2 hours ago, Anna B said:

I agree that politicians should  come from all sectors of society, but do they?

Angela Raynor's background is unusual even in the Labour party, and as far as l know, she has no equivalent in the Tory party.

 

David Davis.

 

Happy to help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Tony said:

I remember a meeting in the HoLs with an opposition peer who was only really interested in how I should fill my boots, and maybe his, through the thing I was there to talk about.  As it happened I wasn't really there for that so my integrity didn't take it further. I've had many more meetings where MPs and peers were interested, motivated and keen to assist on topics that were far outside their own sphere of interest and followed up as they promised. Some of those could very easily have leveraged their position for financial gain but didn't 

 

You're an anonymous poster on an internet forum. I'm sorry but your attempt to provide an en masse character reference for our peers and MPs is wholly wasted. On the other hand, we have just seen a substantial proportion of the Parliamentary Conservative party vote to give their sleazy weasel of a colleague a free pass. Apparently, many of them are angry about being 'made to do it' on the orders of the PM.

 

Having talked a lot of humbug about reforming the disciplinary process, the Government has now dropped those plans as too embarrassing to carry forward in the current climate.

 

Ffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.