Categories
The Tory Sleaze narrative is not going away – politicalbetting.com
The Tory Sleaze narrative is not going away – politicalbetting.com
The vice-chair of the Conservative Party has resigned because he feels he can no longer defend the PM's handling of corruption allegations.This is big.https://t.co/T0oircROWi
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
After spending 33 years at the channel, Boulton is departing Sky News. It’s over for the public school, Oxbridge, male old guard, he says
Paywall that I can't access -
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/adam-boulton-on-leaving-sky-news-we-baby-boomers-have-had-our-day-hhkrv33sb
Withers appeared to be paying him almost £1,000 per hour.
I can get most property QCs for that, quite commonly substantially less. Are they making a loss? Or is he doing more hours than reported?
However I expect the damage will be evident in the polling for a while and the two by elections will be a very good test
In this current (IMO toxic) environment, I'd be trying to make as few expenses claims as possible, even where they are reasonable - and be unfairly out-of-pocket as a result.
By the same stage in 1990 and 2008 Thatcher's Tories and Brown's Labour were losing seats in by elections on big swings eg in 1990 the Tories lost North Staffordshire and Eastbourne, in 2008 Labour lost Crewe and Nantwich in by elections
England 1 Jos Buttler (wk), 2 Jonny Bairstow, 3 Dawid Malan, 4 Eoin Morgan (capt), 5 Liam Livingstone, 6 Moeen Ali, 7 Sam Billings, 8 Chris Woakes, 9 Chris Jordan, 10 Adil Rashid, 11 Mark Wood
New Zealand 1 Martin Guptill, 2 Daryl Mitchell, 3 Kane Williamson (capt), 4 Devon Conway (wk), 5 Glenn Phillips, 6 James Neesham, 7 Mitchell Santner, 8 Adam Milne, 9 Tim Southee, 10 Ish Sodhi, 11 Trent Boult.
Yes it's a toxic regressive attitude and it's what is happening already for years with FBPE.
The circlejerk of people Scott constantly quotes repeating for the umpteenth time why they dislike Brexit, getting retweeted by the FBPE crowd, isn't productive or effective.
If people want to engage with something new then that's interesting, but telling us that Sir John Major doesn't like Brexit, or that Ireland don't want Article 16 invoked is about as productive as telling us that Nigel Farage doesn't like the EU, or that the DUP do want Article 16 invoked.
In a parallel universe somewhere, the Tories got Paterson to make a decent mea culpa and take his 30-day suspension, the recall in his seat either did not get off the ground or, if it did, they successfully defended the seat - especially had they chosen a fresh candidate.
Instead, the strategic brilliance and sure-footed judgement of our PM has led them well and truly into the mire.
As I said, I'd be very hesitant to take anything other than the absolute minimum on expenses, and that £80k would soon lessen given costs.
England are going to lose this semi final.
Billings in for Roy.
The fact that the Tories have won two General Elections since the last by election defence should tell you that.
Don’t you get the feeling that pressure is building up behind a dam that is going to burst? With huge implications for our politics and our society.
The transition of power to the next generation is going to be a bumpy one, IMHO.
Got an ACCA on England to win, get highest first partnership, highest powerplay, most 4s and most 6s.
Easier to do that if batting first as don't run out of runs to chase. Ideally England smash it all over the park, NZ get a duck in the first over and we bowl them out.
You what? It is nearly three times the average wage. Downsides to the job? Like having to get up every day at 5am to take a bus to your factory shift and be at the mercy of a tetchy foreman?
MPs are compensated for all the "downsides".
Maybe society would be different if politics wasn't dominated by lawyers who think triple the national average wage is peanuts?
Though we do ideally want some of the top 1% to seek to become PM or join the Cabinet, it is there that the pay needs to be raised a bit to ensure they are top 1% roles (currently they are not, even if you may get Chequers and Chevening while in the role)
It’s about comparable with GPs, junior to mid management, junior barristers etc.
Most professional Londoners can aspire to earning 80k+ at some stage in their working career.
There are only 650 MPs, and we expect them to act - quite literally - as leaders of their respective communities. I personally think they are around 30-50% underpaid.
If they're just interested in making money then they should stay in the private sector doing so and their contribution to politics can include the taxes they pay going to further our politics.
But it's not "unimaginable".
Poor people can and do imagine winning the lottery.
Heather Long
@byHeatherLong
BREAKING: U.S. inflation was up 6.2% in October over a year ago. That’s the highest inflation in 31 years.
Inflation was up 0.9% in Oct. alone, a much higher increase than 0.4% in Sept. and 0.3% in August.
Prices are rising for food, energy, shelter, used cars and new cars.
Also:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/10/why-the-federal-reserve-chair-jerome-powell-must-go
Economic policymaking requires careful judgment and a recognition of trade-offs. How important is inflation versus jobs and growth? How confident can we be that markets are efficient, stable, fair, and competitive on their own? How concerned should we be about inequality? America’s two main parties have always had markedly different but clearly articulated perspectives on these matters (at least until the Republicans’ descent into populist madness).
To my mind, the Democrats are right to worry more about the consequences of joblessness. The 2008 crisis showed that unfettered markets are neither efficient nor stable. Moreover, we know that marginalised groups have been brought into the economy and wage disparities reduced only when labour markets are tight.
They are not compensated for the downsides; not in the least. David Amess sadly suffered from one rather extreme downside, as did Jo Cox before him. Then there's all the abuse, vitriol and threats the job attracts from knobs nice people online. Or the way people will look for ill in anything you do, even when you are cleaner than clean. Or the way every part of your life might be placed under the microscope at any moment, or any words you utter in public - or even private - might be used against you.
Yes, there are worse jobs. There are jobs that are far worse, and which should be paid much more; and those which should attract less pay (although that is, of course, always arguable). But being an MP is an unusual job, with a role that is often temporary and multifaceted.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I quite admire anyone who puts themselves up for election, knowing all of the above. They have a bravery that I don't.
Allow those in receipt of the unemployment benefit to no longer register as a “jobseeker”. Thus, they are no longer need to be included in ILO definition of unemployed.
Trebles all round!
Which means it's unimaginable wealth to a lot of voters even though posters on here look it at and go hmm, how much extra hassle for how little money.
However the PM only gets £161,866, just in and Cabinet Ministers get a bit less than that, closer to £130,000.
They should at least be clearly in the top 1% of earners given the responsibilities they have
If your sole ambition is furthering your own bank account then you shouldn't be in politics. That's what the private sector should be for.
Crowds look three quarters empty as it stands.
A better question is should an MPs office be appointed by the MP or should it be almost part of the civil service with each MP having an office of say 4 staff paid for directly by Parliament.
NZ to win, I fear.
Rather, what are analogue professions paid?
On the evidence we have so far, Iain “Ooohh, Betsy” Duncan Smith needs to explain why he shouldn’t resign.
Hardly, being an MP should be a top 10% job, being PM or a Cabinet Minister should be a top 1% job.
Do we want the best people in Parliament or government or not? Yes it is a public service role that should not be gone into solely for money but at the same time as the old saying goes 'if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys'
Unattainable? Almost certainly.
But unimaginable? Absolutely bloody not.
We have footballers earning four or five times that EACH WEEK, but the poor are too pathetically minded to even imagine 80k pa?
I haven't dug deep enough to work out whether this is tax free or taxable - the former would make it 23-24k, which is your 30% for the 72 London MPs.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9148/
I'm not really clear of a rationale for "community leaders" to be defined by income.
Edit: though at least one MP seems to have been happy to be a MP in exile.
Get a move on Bairstow!
In a General Election? Yes, so long as the rest of the results went ok.
Dr. Jonathan Crane : Your guilt has been determined. This is merely a sentencing hearing. Now, what will it be? Death or Exile?
Jim Gordon : Crane, if you think we're going to walk out on that ice willingly, you got another thing coming!
Dr. Jonathan Crane : So it's death then?
Jim Gordon : Looks that way.
Dr. Jonathan Crane : Very well. Death!
[smashes gavel]
Dr. Jonathan Crane : By exile!
Who, now, goes into politics?
I know this is a cliched point, but it is relevant to the question of MP remuneration. Those who wish to pay to pay them tuppence need to ask whether MPs have too great or too little responsibility, and whether they are paid proportionately.
It has got to the point that if my child said they wished to become an MP I would ask if they didn’t have more serious ambitions.
In this parliament if you're on the Conservative side it looks like a combination of slavish obedience and being able to not answer questions.
Now there are excellent MPs in the house, but it looks a very optional extra. Is it worth paying them £83k a year to trot through the house like nodding dogs ?
And the same is true of any parliament where there's a Gov't majority.
A lot of the problems that MPs have to deal with is the unrealistic expectations of their constituents.
Because it is Winner Takes All.
Labour retained Batley & Spen by 35 to 34.
Labour won. That is what is remembered. It is not remembered that Labour shed vote share, or went backwards, or nearly lost.
If the Tories retain OB&S by 10 %, 1 %, 0.1 %, 0.01 % or even by a solitary vote, then that is job well done for the Tories.
Based on experience, I'd eliminate lawyers and journalists, and anyone with a PPE degree.
And me, because I know everything.
One thing we don't get is any metrics of how hard MPs work in, and for, their constituencies. And that's a major (the major?) part of the role.
39/40 is a bad result.
That's the cruel nature of First Past The Post.
Not good enough.
1) Is it full time or part time?
2) What is career progression as an MP?
3) What are the metrics of a good MP?
4) What training do they require?
5) What qualifications could they get to add to their skills?
{Add more here}
The current system where you get the job, and that's it, seems inadequate.
Lose by one vote: bad news.
Lose in a General Election rather than a by election: disaster. (Unless mitigated by other results)
Be more aggressive FFS!
Doesn't matter if you get caught if the next batsman can bat.
On the other hand there is the prestige that comes with being an MP, and the excitement. But I don't necessarily think it's healthy to pack the commons with people who are there to feed their egos, or to indulge in political fanaticism.
That's why I think the sleaze story has taken a (deliberately?) confusing turn by conflating real instances of corruption - paid lobbying in government, cash for peerages, Covid contracts for mates, you name it - with the vaguer and much less clear cut question of whether MPs should have second jobs.
Dear God
Do they really need expensive office teams who are 80% deployed in the social work sense - primarily as part of their re-election campaign to generate local goodwill. If this activity were sent back to CAB, could the money saved on much smaller teams free up the funds for better paid MPs.
I think you will find that the social work thing is often incredibly useful for normal people.
The weight of an MP phoning up and asking why Mrs Miggins (pensioner) can't seem to get anyone to fix the roof of her Housing Association property etc....
Bump Livingstone up next!
The voting system, in my opinion, does a lot to lower the quality. As we saw in the last Parliament it gives way too much power to the party machines to discipline backbench MPs.
If we took steps to reduce the power of the party machines then the job of an MP would be more interesting and you might encourage more interesting people to want to be one.