Options
The Mail continues with it attacks on Cox – politicalbetting.com
The Mail continues with it attacks on Cox – politicalbetting.com
For the second day running the Daily Mail decides that Geoffrey Cox is the main story unlike almost the rest of the papers which have moved on.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Listening to the radio this morning the second job controversy was not mentioned or referenced
Indeed the news stories seem largely to have moved on even on BBC and Sky
Actually it seems Megan Markle has dominated the news this morning and not in a good way for her
Can't do that on third as it is a Prime position.
This one asked me if I have a "big diesel", but not whether I drive it 3k or 30k miles per annum, and if I have "solar panels", but did not explore that they generate 2-3x as much electricity as I actually use.
On the meat, they often have a worldwide average which holds our local beef responsible for demolishing rainforests - whilst the research work shows that UK beef runs at approx. half the world average for emissions, with some systems being better than that.
I'm having a look at the more recommended one, but *&^% Apple are telling me I need V13 or V15 of their OS.
Tory MP Geoffrey Cox’s two homes greed exposed as he rents out taxpayer-funded flat
MP Geoffrey Cox rents out London flat you helped fund; he then claims more for a second home in the capital; he even received £3,800 for two months he was in the Caribbean
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mp-geoffrey-coxs-two-25429742
The Cox gambit has paid off well for the government. I hope IDS, Bradley, Johnson and Co will pay him well for his diversionary services.
"In another life, Boris Johnson might have spent his days trying the handles of parked cars"
Now 2nd jobs alone is an issue, but less so than those who then abuse a conflict because of their 2nd job.
I feel that Geoffrey Cox is getting the focus while not being the chief offender more out of envy for his wealth. Let's focus on those who abuse their conflict of interest.
It would keep MPs more in touch with the real world, if they were all connected more with the real world instead of being career politicians.
It always struck me as futile to try and move clearing. So it has proven.
Perhaps they thought Boris might too much credit otherwise?
Expenses and public money should never have got involved in helping to fund MPs' property speculation.
Those that need accommodation in London should be covered the costs of their rent. End of.
If MPs can be full time Ministers as well, no reason why backbench MPs cannot also have second jobs in their previous profession too they still devote some time to
https://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2021/11/daniel-hannan-proposals-to-restrict-mps-outside-work-run-up-against-the-same-problem-what-are-good-and-bad-jobs.html
I was first, but forgot to post.
Why is that? 🤔
And if he sells his Battersea flat and invests the money elsewhere his compensation should go up?
I agree that the previous system was wrong, but it’s inequitable to treat people today differently.
He has also converted what was a LD held seat in 1997 and 2001 into a safe Conservative seat where he had a majority of 41% in 2019
Indeed Lucy Powell was more than embarrassed when asked about it on the news this morning
And today is the 11 November
MP1 already owns a flat in London, so they live in it, zero loss zero gain.
MP2 doesn’t own a flat in London so they rent one and the exact cost of the rent is covered as an expense, zero loss zero gain.
He is not claiming a penny in extra expenses from taxpayers or is the work he is getting because he is an MP, it is instead earnings from his private legal practice as he had before election
They should not get a free option on house prices, as @IanB2 said
A bigger issue for me is why we as taxpayers have apparently paid for a mortgage for him on expenses. Someone working a minimum wage job on Universal Credit can't use Housing Benefit to pay for a mortgage, even if it would be cheaper than paying rent, so why should he be able to claim a mortgage on expenses? Why shouldn't the same rules apply?
Biden firefighting 6% inflation in US.
Meanwhile: "official figures from Chinese factories on Wednesday pointed to producer prices climbing at their fastest pace in 26 years amid elevated raw material costs and power shortages.
Chinese factory gate prices jumped 13.5pc year-on-year in October"
(Telegraph)
The economically rationale thing to do would be for MP1 to sell their flat and reinvest the proceeds elsewhere. They then don’t own a flat and can get one paid for by the state
Cox is working a dozen hours a week as a lawyer, in the same way a doctor might work a couple of shifts in the hospital.
The problem is those whose jobs are lobbying, political advise, access to ministers or other things purely because they are an MP.
The edge cases are those who worked in political consultancy before they were MPs (including unions), and yet another reason why we need to be encouraging people to have had a life before Parliament.
The chair of some standards review body set up by John Major has just been on the radio saying that his committee produced a report with recommendations on second jobs way back, but MPs never implemented it.
Threats from Nadine?
In most of the world Ministers are not members of the legislature and are a full time job. Do you really think that being Foreign Secretary is "just a promotion" and not a job in its own right? Why isn't her counterpart Blinken in the US Congress?
They’re supposed to be full-time legislators ffs.
Mirror planting a couple of landmines for Labour in their desire to bash a Tory, as there are numbers of MPs renting out flats bought at a time when Expenses offered the option of paying interest on a mortgage - which led to main residence flipping with some heroic abuses. There are MPs of most parties on that list.
The intention was that profits from selling such flats would be clawed back, and sales should have been forced then and there as good intentions that cost MPs personal money have a habit of being ignored, but iPSA have - and still are - soft-pedalling it. Regulatory capture.
Labour MP John Mann said: “The understanding after the expenses scandal was that parliament would claim back profits made from house sales. I am surprised to learn that this appears not to be happening.”
But an Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority official said: “There are no plans to ask MPs to make any additional payments, seven years after mortgage claims ended.”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/scandal-mps-claiming-cash-rent-14277665
MPs who hang around Westminster all the time as unqualified but seriously overpaid social workers contributing nothing to the public good should really stand in awe and hang their heads in shame.
The Commons doesn't even sit full-time so who ever said they're "supposed" to be that?
Too busy reading the comments ?
I aim to be pragmatic at the end of the day.
An expense isn't supposed to be a payment for their benefit, but to cover a cost.
Why am I paying for the London home of a wealthy MP if they own ANOTHER London property they are renting to someone else? That’s blatant graft. I naively thought all this had been sorted with the expenses scandal, yet not?
Many will feel similarly
Last week you were demanding MPs take a paycut and now you're encouraging the "troughers" to fill their boots. Mad!
Give them a decent salary and accountable allowance and NO second jobs while in office and no lobbying jobs for 5 years or one full Parliament thereafter. I remember our Conservative MP lost his seats in 1997 he returned to the mundanity of being a sub-postmaster.
Oh and if people like Allin-Khan need to complete CPD for their medical career to continue after they are hurled out of office in a Tory- landslide they do so gratis ...or vice versa.
Being an MP has never been full time. It can't be either until we scrap Ministers being MPs.
"Dispiriting doesn’t even begin to describe the current Government’s performance."
"It isn’t too late for Boris Johnson to turn things around, but for now the outlook is dismal. When I ask Tories what is going on, they shrug, point to the fact that they are still, usually, ahead in the polls, and thank God for the lacklustre Keir Starmer."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/11/10/feckless-tory-government-has-charted-course-absolute-failure/
Like I said I refuse to engage with your fiction that being a minister is a second job.
Ministers in the Lords are analogous to contractors.
I also enjoy when one ONS release disagrees with another one, particularly when they come out on the same day.
Chris Bryant is on the list of MPs who made money renting out flats previously purchased with mortgage interest paid by MP Expenses, according to the Mirror.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/scandal-mps-claiming-cash-rent-14277665
The line from the Mirror this morning will help diffuse the story.
(...ever thought of standing for parliament?
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16697509/mps-drinking-armistice-day-flight-lack-of-respect/
While the Telegraph treats us to a photo of her, as well as her name:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/11/10/labour-snp-mps-criticised-drinking-heavily-official-flight-gibraltar/
Wonder what the "legal reasons" could be?
I'm not sure of the timescales but it fits into a 'one rule for them ...' meme.
There is certainly more than enough legislation, select committees, constituency work to keep any MP busy full-time, should they want to do that. Then there are think tanks, mountains of research produced in areas of interest etc.
But since MPs are their own bosses, they can obviously opt to do less if they want (and it seems many choose to do so). I am certainly naive, but it seems to me an extraordinary privilege to be able to do that work on behalf of your country. And personally I think it's very disappointing that many seem to take that for granted.
Firstly the number of MPs is reduced and constituencies enlarged. Then at each election potential MPs stand as a “pair” from the same party.
Of this pair one is the designated representative of the constituency in parliament and one is the “stay at home” constituency MP.
The stay at home MP gets office expenses and a sensible budget for travel and overnight stay in London for official constituency business with the parliamentary rep.
The parliamentary rep gets the full time use of a designated property based on their family (or not) needs but they are moving to London to work full time so no need for dual homes - up to them if they want to keep or rent out their home in their constituency.
The parliamentary MP has more time to focus on parliamentary matters and as fewer MPs more will be in govt roles or shadow govt roles.
The constituency MP is able to fully focus on seeing constituents and relaying the issues to their “pair” in parliament.
It’s not going to solve second jobs issue but removes the issue where an MP gets “lost” between their constituency and parliament…. People can see easier what they are actually up to each day so if working on second jobs too much it’s going to be noticed as parliament MP isn’t checked into parliament and constituency MO isn’t in office or visiting somewhere in constituency.
Haven’t though about the vote yet - does the parliament MP take vote instruction from constituency MP as they are closer to the action?
Sorry if this is total bollocks but won’t be the first time!
The expenses are there to help you do the job, not to fund your property investments. That’s it. It’s that basic