politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Marf on MPs with 2 jobs
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Marf on MPs with 2 jobs
Marf on 2 job MPs pic.twitter.com/90nvhU5cEI
Comments
-
Nice cartoon, Marf!
Wonder how many MPs could moonlight as cartoonists....
0 -
Just looking into the Runes for tonight's YouGov...0
-
At least one:Sunil_Prasannan said:Nice cartoon, Marf!
Wonder how many MPs could moonlight as cartoonists....
http://www.gloucestershireecho.co.uk/Cheltenham-MP-Martin-Horwood-pens-cartoon-Echo/story-25838165-detail/story.html0 -
So what do we reckon? Tory lead? Tie? Labour lead?GIN1138 said:Just looking into the Runes for tonight's YouGov...
0 -
Not bad at all!Richard_Nabavi said:
At least one:Sunil_Prasannan said:Nice cartoon, Marf!
Wonder how many MPs could moonlight as cartoonists....
http://www.gloucestershireecho.co.uk/Cheltenham-MP-Martin-Horwood-pens-cartoon-Echo/story-25838165-detail/story.html0 -
When I was eating lentil soup at Brighton Uni the lecturers there told the students that the American politicians that decided to invade Iraq all got a massive earner out of it as they had shares in Army equipment and bombmaking companies etc.. any truth in this?!0
-
Shares? At one point Dick Cheney WAS the Military Industrial Complex. Ever heard of Halliburton?isam said:When I was eating lentil soup at Brighton Uni the lecturers there told the students that the American politicians that decided to invade Iraq all got a massive earner out of it as they had shares in Army equipment and bombmaking companies etc.. any truth in this?!
That's him that is.0 -
The idea that the current HOC represents the best this country has to offer or even just "great talent" is patently absurd.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, certainly I'm arguing that. I mean, you are clearly someone of great talent, but even you didn't make the grade!Jonathan said:Wow. Are you seriously arguing that the Commons is currently stuffed full of talent that would otherwise be lured away?
0 -
Is there not an argument that MPs should be required to have a second job? Ministers etc could be exempt and so could Chairman of committees who want to be. Every other MP should be required to have some contact with the real world (and for the avoidance of doubt that would not include working for a political party). It would make the House a better place.
My MP, Jim McGovern, has no entries in the Register of Members interests. Why am I not surprised?
Also has Boris thought this through? If Ed actually brought this nonsense into force he could face a horrendous fall in his income.0 -
Isam...you could afford soup at Uni...Luxury0
-
Hat off to Martin Horwood - he's really rather good.Richard_Nabavi said:
At least one:Sunil_Prasannan said:Nice cartoon, Marf!
Wonder how many MPs could moonlight as cartoonists....
http://www.gloucestershireecho.co.uk/Cheltenham-MP-Martin-Horwood-pens-cartoon-Echo/story-25838165-detail/story.html0 -
F1: Manor have named Will Stevens, British chap, as their first driver.
Force India reveal first image of their new car:
http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/12477/9731509/force-india-belatedly-reveal-vjm08-car-ahead-of-debut-at-final-barcelona-test
Livery's nice, but hard to tell what the front wing's like, or the width of the sidepods (Sauber's are a bit chunky, most others are slimmed down).0 -
FPT
-
Dair said:
» show previous quotes
You do not know 300 people's inclination to be an MP or 300 people's salary levels.
Seriously, who do you think you will kid with this nonsense?
-
It is amazing what you emerges over a period of time in normal society if you:
A) care about people and are able to talk to them and maintain friendships
...no, just A)
0 -
How does Boris's job as a newspaper columnist give him contact with the real world?DavidL said:Is there not an argument that MPs should be required to have a second job? Ministers etc could be exempt and so could Chairman of committees who want to be. Every other MP should be required to have some contact with the real world (and for the avoidance of doubt that would not include working for a political party). It would make the House a better place.
My MP, Jim McGovern, has no entries in the Register of Members interests. Why am I not surprised?
Also has Boris thought this through? If Ed actually brought this nonsense into force he could face a horrendous fall in his income.
Diligent MPs who do regular surgeries and get out into their constituencies surely see a lot more of the real world than most of us on here.
0 -
Of course it is. As is the idea that someone's salary is an indicator of their intelligence and wisdom.Jonathan said:
The idea that the current HOC represents the best this country has to offer or even just "great talent" is patently absurd.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, certainly I'm arguing that. I mean, you are clearly someone of great talent, but even you didn't make the grade!Jonathan said:Wow. Are you seriously arguing that the Commons is currently stuffed full of talent that would otherwise be lured away?
0 -
From Wiki citingfrom the Telegraph: -DavidL said:Is there not an argument that MPs should be required to have a second job? Ministers etc could be exempt and so could Chairman of committees who want to be. Every other MP should be required to have some contact with the real world (and for the avoidance of doubt that would not include working for a political party). It would make the House a better place.
My MP, Jim McGovern, has no entries in the Register of Members interests. Why am I not surprised?
Also has Boris thought this through? If Ed actually brought this nonsense into force he could face a horrendous fall in his income.
"McGovern lost his appeal against the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority's rejection of a £23.90 single rail ticket from Dundee to Glasgow in April 2013.[3] The Sunday Herald reported that Parliamentary authorities determined that the detour was unconnected to McGovern's official work as an MP. He had been attending a Labour Party event in Glasgow. IPSA revealed that its bill for defending against McGovern's appeal was £27,000, to be met by the taxpayers."
Cream of the crop.0 -
I suspect that if you looked at the CVs of the lecturers you might find a slight left-wing bias. i.e. inherently against the USA.isam said:When I was eating lentil soup at Brighton Uni the lecturers there told the students that the American politicians that decided to invade Iraq all got a massive earner out of it as they had shares in Army equipment and bombmaking companies etc.. any truth in this?!
However we were all young once, so I assume you learned cynicism after leaving Uni.
0 -
I am 100% certain that one of your options will be correct.Sunil_Prasannan said:
So what do we reckon? Tory lead? Tie? Labour lead?GIN1138 said:Just looking into the Runes for tonight's YouGov...
0 -
F1: for those wondering, the enormo-haddock blog will roar back to life shortly after the final test, with a pre-season piece of pondering prior to the first pre-qualifying prognostications of the year.
Be interesting to see how Manor and Force India get on.
Edited extra bit: for those wanting a refresher, check my post-season review of 2014, including a lovely graph:
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/2014-f1-season-review.html0 -
Why didn't they charge him costs?Dair said:
From Wiki citingfrom the Telegraph: -DavidL said:Is there not an argument that MPs should be required to have a second job? Ministers etc could be exempt and so could Chairman of committees who want to be. Every other MP should be required to have some contact with the real world (and for the avoidance of doubt that would not include working for a political party). It would make the House a better place.
My MP, Jim McGovern, has no entries in the Register of Members interests. Why am I not surprised?
Also has Boris thought this through? If Ed actually brought this nonsense into force he could face a horrendous fall in his income.
"McGovern lost his appeal against the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority's rejection of a £23.90 single rail ticket from Dundee to Glasgow in April 2013.[3] The Sunday Herald reported that Parliamentary authorities determined that the detour was unconnected to McGovern's official work as an MP. He had been attending a Labour Party event in Glasgow. IPSA revealed that its bill for defending against McGovern's appeal was £27,000, to be met by the taxpayers."
Cream of the crop.
And who the f*ck authorised that expenditure by IPSA's lawyers?0 -
No but here's the thing.Jonathan said:
The idea that the current HOC represents the best this country has to offer or even just "great talent" is patently absurd.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, certainly I'm arguing that. I mean, you are clearly someone of great talent, but even you didn't make the grade!Jonathan said:Wow. Are you seriously arguing that the Commons is currently stuffed full of talent that would otherwise be lured away?
You could become an MP.
Yes, you.
It is one of the few professions where no formal qualifications are required. Just the intent.
So if you (or anyone, Guardian blogger, Daily Mail commentator, Sun editorial writer) have a problem - then go for it. Get involved.
Complaining about MPs is like that old joke about the guy who travels by train to see a friend. When he gets there the friend asks how the journey was and the guy says - dreadful I had to sit facing backwards the whole way and that always makes me feel sick. The friend asks why he didn't ask the person sitting opposite him facing forwards if they would mind swapping and the guy says - that was the worst bit...there was no one sitting opposite me...0 -
Not quite as absurd as your comment the previous threadJonathan said:
The idea that the current HOC represents the best this country has to offer or even just "great talent" is patently absurd.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, certainly I'm arguing that. I mean, you are clearly someone of great talent, but even you didn't make the grade!Jonathan said:Wow. Are you seriously arguing that the Commons is currently stuffed full of talent that would otherwise be lured away?
In any event i doubt the HOC has ever represented the best we have .0 -
Yet it is nonsense.Mortimer said:FPT
-
Dair said:
» show previous quotes
You do not know 300 people's inclination to be an MP or 300 people's salary levels.
Seriously, who do you think you will kid with this nonsense?
-
It is amazing what you emerges over a period of time in normal society if you:
A) care about people and are able to talk to them and maintain friendships...no, just A)
There are plenty of studies which show the average peer group is less than 12 people. The idea anyone on earth has a peer group of 300 is completely ridiculous.0 -
There's a small but non-zero chance that UKIP will be in the lead. So you shouldn't beweejonnie said:
I am 100% certain that one of your options will be correct.Sunil_Prasannan said:
So what do we reckon? Tory lead? Tie? Labour lead?GIN1138 said:Just looking into the Runes for tonight's YouGov...
0 -
Which is why RIchard's original point is so amazingly daft.SquareRoot said:
Not quite as absurd as your comment the previous threadJonathan said:
The idea that the current HOC represents the best this country has to offer or even just "great talent" is patently absurd.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, certainly I'm arguing that. I mean, you are clearly someone of great talent, but even you didn't make the grade!Jonathan said:Wow. Are you seriously arguing that the Commons is currently stuffed full of talent that would otherwise be lured away?
In any event i doubt the HOC has ever represented the best we have .0 -
I went when I was 35!weejonnie said:
I suspect that if you looked at the CVs of the lecturers you might find a slight left-wing bias. i.e. inherently against the USA.isam said:When I was eating lentil soup at Brighton Uni the lecturers there told the students that the American politicians that decided to invade Iraq all got a massive earner out of it as they had shares in Army equipment and bombmaking companies etc.. any truth in this?!
However we were all young once, so I assume you learned cynicism after leaving Uni.
Had a row, left after a year
Went in a Labour voter, left a UKIP member.. the bias was so extreme as to be sickening0 -
Er, I wasn't complaining. I was just disagreeing with Richard's comment that the HOC is so stuffed full of talent that you need second salaries to ward off the endless queues of headhunters.TOPPING said:
No but here's the thing.Jonathan said:
The idea that the current HOC represents the best this country has to offer or even just "great talent" is patently absurd.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, certainly I'm arguing that. I mean, you are clearly someone of great talent, but even you didn't make the grade!Jonathan said:Wow. Are you seriously arguing that the Commons is currently stuffed full of talent that would otherwise be lured away?
You could become an MP.
Yes, you.
It is one of the few professions where no formal qualifications are required. Just the intent.
So if you (or anyone, Guardian blogger, Daily Mail commentator, Sun editorial writer) have a problem - then go for it. Get involved.
Complaining about MPs is like that old joke about the guy who travels by train to see a friend. When he gets there the friend asks how the journey was and the guy says - dreadful I had to sit facing backwards the whole way and that always makes me feel sick. The friend asks why he didn't ask the person sitting opposite him facing forwards if they would mind swapping and the guy says - that was the worst bit...there was no one sitting opposite me...0 -
Thank you for this link, Richard. I hadn't seen it. I think what he drew was very touching and original. I hope he goes back to cartooning one day. Funnily enough, I might be moving to a town near Cheltenham. So pleased my future local MP is a cartoonist! How perfect.Richard_Nabavi said:
At least one:Sunil_Prasannan said:Nice cartoon, Marf!
Wonder how many MPs could moonlight as cartoonists....
http://www.gloucestershireecho.co.uk/Cheltenham-MP-Martin-Horwood-pens-cartoon-Echo/story-25838165-detail/story.html
0 -
What rot.Dair said:
Yet it is nonsense.Mortimer said:FPT
-
Dair said:
» show previous quotes
You do not know 300 people's inclination to be an MP or 300 people's salary levels.
Seriously, who do you think you will kid with this nonsense?
-
It is amazing what you emerges over a period of time in normal society if you:
A) care about people and are able to talk to them and maintain friendships...no, just A)
There are plenty of studies which show the average peer group is less than 12 people. The idea anyone on earth has a peer group of 300 is completely ridiculous.
I've worked on projects where I would daily talk, eat, have coffees, meet with at least 50 people of my age group, socio economic background and similar skill set.
I studied at a college where I would on a daily basis work, eat, chat, have a beer with 100 or more people within 3 years of me.
Facebook started in the UK about 6 months before I went to Oxford, and I'm therefore still decently in touch with just about anyone I ever had a meaningful conversation with whilst there. Add in linkedin and I have a decent idea of what they're earning...
0 -
The expenditure also points to the fact that MPs are not particularly over paid and that the IPSA's staff are rather under qualified with parhaps rather too much time on their hands.Charles said:
Why didn't they charge him costs?Dair said:
From Wiki citingfrom the Telegraph: -DavidL said:Is there not an argument that MPs should be required to have a second job? Ministers etc could be exempt and so could Chairman of committees who want to be. Every other MP should be required to have some contact with the real world (and for the avoidance of doubt that would not include working for a political party). It would make the House a better place.
My MP, Jim McGovern, has no entries in the Register of Members interests. Why am I not surprised?
Also has Boris thought this through? If Ed actually brought this nonsense into force he could face a horrendous fall in his income.
"McGovern lost his appeal against the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority's rejection of a £23.90 single rail ticket from Dundee to Glasgow in April 2013.[3] The Sunday Herald reported that Parliamentary authorities determined that the detour was unconnected to McGovern's official work as an MP. He had been attending a Labour Party event in Glasgow. IPSA revealed that its bill for defending against McGovern's appeal was £27,000, to be met by the taxpayers."
Cream of the crop.
And who the f*ck authorised that expenditure by IPSA's lawyers?
This issue is just another opportunity for another mindless anti politics rant from a bunch of people sadly in need of a life.0 -
As a PB Tory in academia, I can confirm this!isam said:
I went when I was 35!weejonnie said:
I suspect that if you looked at the CVs of the lecturers you might find a slight left-wing bias. i.e. inherently against the USA.isam said:When I was eating lentil soup at Brighton Uni the lecturers there told the students that the American politicians that decided to invade Iraq all got a massive earner out of it as they had shares in Army equipment and bombmaking companies etc.. any truth in this?!
However we were all young once, so I assume you learned cynicism after leaving Uni.
Had a row, left after a year
Went in a Labour voter, left a UKIP member.. the bias was so extreme as to be sickening0 -
Looks like Andy Burnham isn't happy with Labour Manchester for teaming up with GO to devolve NHS affairs to Manchester...
Popcorn.0 -
Just watching William Hague demolish labours second job debate with enormous humour and incredulity.0
-
Why continue the lie?Mortimer said:
What rot.Dair said:
Yet it is nonsense.Mortimer said:FPT
-
Dair said:
» show previous quotes
You do not know 300 people's inclination to be an MP or 300 people's salary levels.
Seriously, who do you think you will kid with this nonsense?
-
It is amazing what you emerges over a period of time in normal society if you:
A) care about people and are able to talk to them and maintain friendships...no, just A)
There are plenty of studies which show the average peer group is less than 12 people. The idea anyone on earth has a peer group of 300 is completely ridiculous.
I've worked on projects where I would daily talk, eat, have coffees, meet with at least 50 people of my age group, socio economic background and similar skill set.
I studied at a college where I would on a daily basis work, eat, chat, have a beer with 100 or more people within 3 years of me.
Facebook started in the UK about 6 months before I went to Oxford, and I'm therefore still decently in touch with just about anyone I ever had a meaningful conversation with whilst there. Add in linkedin and I have a decent idea of what they're earning...
I'm sure you felt it sounded quite impressive when you decided to invent the claim for your appeal to numbers. But it's still demonstrably false. You can meet thousands of people but your peer group at any one time will still never grow much higher than 20, and as stated, the average is below 12.0 -
BBC headline news. Why is the government tinkering with the NHS barely 80 days from a general election?
Regardless of its merits, it doesn't seem like smart politics to me.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-316152180 -
I see no votes on the 2x MP job .... navel gazing...0
-
Not really - just the ownership of the budget being devolved.Casino_Royale said:BBC headline news. Why is the government tinkering with the NHS barely 80 days from a general election?
Regardless of its merits, it doesn't seem like smart politics to me.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31615218
"Greater Manchester is to become the first English region to get full control of its health spending, as part of an extension of devolved powers.
Chancellor George Osborne said the £6bn health and social care budget would be taken over by the region's councils and health groups."0 -
The locals seem to like it -Casino_Royale said:BBC headline news. Why is the government tinkering with the NHS barely 80 days from a general election?
Regardless of its merits, it doesn't seem like smart politics to me.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31615218
Councillor Mike Connolly, Labour leader of Bury Council, said: "Those decisions need to be made in Greater Manchester and not Westminster, and I welcome any form of devolution to the city region.
"We are all agreed, certainly in the Labour Party, that health and social care must be integrated because it's about providing that primary care - and it can only be good for healthcare across Greater Manchester."0 -
The locals in Manchester have been desperate for devolved powers on numerous issues, this will go down well here.
Forget your EVEL stuff though, Manc MPs are now similar to Welsh and Scottish ones.0 -
Just the Tories setting up another trap for Labour - not quite as good a trap as Better Together but still quite a nice one.Casino_Royale said:BBC headline news. Why is the government tinkering with the NHS barely 80 days from a general election?
Regardless of its merits, it doesn't seem like smart politics to me.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31615218
You can just picture the local grandees of Manchester Labour salivating at all the committee and oversight jobs they can award to their members and family members on six figure sums.
Meanwhile the Tories will get another Labour NHS to whack Andy Burnham over the head with "just LOOK at those appalling A&E times in Labour run Manchester NHS".0 -
Wish me luck.
It's a fantastic film, by the way, if you get the chance to see it. I just watched it, and will see it again tonight.
http://us2.campaign-archive2.com/?u=312cf720117fac1051bd1afe6&id=3636363411&e=3a59b609400 -
"Political/social affairs editor for the Manchester Evening News" tweets :
Jennifer Williams @JenWilliamsMEN 8m8 minutes ago
@davidottewell @DPJHodges but it seems to be Andy Burnham and Ed Balls who are upset. GM MPs perfectly happy
0 -
Did he add "and my wife needs a second part time job on £50k a year on the oversight committee" ?TheWatcher said:
The locals seem to like it -Casino_Royale said:BBC headline news. Why is the government tinkering with the NHS barely 80 days from a general election?
Regardless of its merits, it doesn't seem like smart politics to me.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31615218
Councillor Mike Connolly, Labour leader of Bury Council, said: "Those decisions need to be made in Greater Manchester and not Westminster, and I welcome any form of devolution to the city region.
"We are all agreed, certainly in the Labour Party, that health and social care must be integrated because it's about providing that primary care - and it can only be good for healthcare across Greater Manchester."0 -
Why do you think you, and a study you've read (and potentially misunderstood or misapplied) know more about my friends and acquaintances than I do?Dair said:
Why continue the lie?Mortimer said:
What rot.Dair said:
Yet it is nonsense.Mortimer said:FPT
-
Dair said:
» show previous quotes
You do not know 300 people's inclination to be an MP or 300 people's salary levels.
Seriously, who do you think you will kid with this nonsense?
-
It is amazing what you emerges over a period of time in normal society if you:
A) care about people and are able to talk to them and maintain friendships...no, just A)
There are plenty of studies which show the average peer group is less than 12 people. The idea anyone on earth has a peer group of 300 is completely ridiculous.
I've worked on projects where I would daily talk, eat, have coffees, meet with at least 50 people of my age group, socio economic background and similar skill set.
I studied at a college where I would on a daily basis work, eat, chat, have a beer with 100 or more people within 3 years of me.
Facebook started in the UK about 6 months before I went to Oxford, and I'm therefore still decently in touch with just about anyone I ever had a meaningful conversation with whilst there. Add in linkedin and I have a decent idea of what they're earning...
I'm sure you felt it sounded quite impressive when you decided to invent the claim for your appeal to numbers. But it's still demonstrably false. You can meet thousands of people but your peer group at any one time will still never grow much higher than 20, and as stated, the average is below 12.0 -
No. The Tories never win on the NHS. When it's in the news, Labour benefit.Dair said:
Just the Tories setting up another trap for Labour - not quite as good a trap as Better Together but still quite a nice one.Casino_Royale said:BBC headline news. Why is the government tinkering with the NHS barely 80 days from a general election?
Regardless of its merits, it doesn't seem like smart politics to me.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31615218
You can just picture the local grandees of Manchester Labour salivating at all the committee and oversight jobs they can award to their members and family members on six figure sums.
Meanwhile the Tories will get another Labour NHS to whack Andy Burnham over the head with "just LOOK at those appalling A&E times in Labour run Manchester NHS".
The best they can do is neutralise it as an election issue.0 -
Think you're highlighting your total lack of awareness of how Greater Manchester local politics has worked for the last 25 years.Dair said:
Just the Tories setting up another trap for Labour - not quite as good a trap as Better Together but still quite a nice one.Casino_Royale said:BBC headline news. Why is the government tinkering with the NHS barely 80 days from a general election?
Regardless of its merits, it doesn't seem like smart politics to me.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31615218
You can just picture the local grandees of Manchester Labour salivating at all the committee and oversight jobs they can award to their members and family members on six figure sums.
Meanwhile the Tories will get another Labour NHS to whack Andy Burnham over the head with "just LOOK at those appalling A&E times in Labour run Manchester NHS".
This is the inevitable consequence of AGMA which dates back to 1986.0 -
Because empirical studies and human sociology are pretty well understood.Mortimer said:
Why do you think you, and a study you've read (and potentially misunderstood or misapplied) know more about my friends and acquaintances than I do?Dair said:
Why continue the lie?
I'm sure you felt it sounded quite impressive when you decided to invent the claim for your appeal to numbers. But it's still demonstrably false. You can meet thousands of people but your peer group at any one time will still never grow much higher than 20, and as stated, the average is below 12.
Interestingly, another of the consistent results of peer group studies is that people massively over-estimate the size of their own peer group.0 -
Any ONLINE betting markets on Kensington selection ?
can't find the ladbrokes one..
0 -
Tories. Changing something about NHS. Headline news. Words like 'reorganisation' and 'big change' pop up in it. Labour will misrepresent and weaponise. Labour will win the politics. And may even increase poll share.TGOHF said:
Not really - just the ownership of the budget being devolved.Casino_Royale said:BBC headline news. Why is the government tinkering with the NHS barely 80 days from a general election?
Regardless of its merits, it doesn't seem like smart politics to me.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31615218
"Greater Manchester is to become the first English region to get full control of its health spending, as part of an extension of devolved powers.
Chancellor George Osborne said the £6bn health and social care budget would be taken over by the region's councils and health groups."
Noone will care about or notice the details. The best thing the Tories can do is keep the NHS entirely out of the news and steer debate onto the economy. This is stupid.
Unless of course Osborne has concluded he won't win anyway and is just trying to make as many reforms he can in the little time he has left before the election. Which is in itself interesting.0 -
Dair said:
Because empirical studies and human sociology are pretty well understood.Mortimer said:
Why do you think you, and a study you've read (and potentially misunderstood or misapplied) know more about my friends and acquaintances than I do?Dair said:
Why continue the lie?
I'm sure you felt it sounded quite impressive when you decided to invent the claim for your appeal to numbers. But it's still demonstrably false. You can meet thousands of people but your peer group at any one time will still never grow much higher than 20, and as stated, the average is below 12.
Interestingly, another of the consistent results of peer group studies is that people massively over-estimate the size of their own peer group.
You both probably need to provide your definition of "peer group".
0 -
You mean the loose association of the successor councils to the former Unitary authority? This seems to be irrelevant.ManchesterKurt said:
Think you're highlighting your total lack of awareness of how Greater Manchester local politics has worked for the last 25 years.Dair said:
Just the Tories setting up another trap for Labour - not quite as good a trap as Better Together but still quite a nice one.Casino_Royale said:BBC headline news. Why is the government tinkering with the NHS barely 80 days from a general election?
Regardless of its merits, it doesn't seem like smart politics to me.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31615218
You can just picture the local grandees of Manchester Labour salivating at all the committee and oversight jobs they can award to their members and family members on six figure sums.
Meanwhile the Tories will get another Labour NHS to whack Andy Burnham over the head with "just LOOK at those appalling A&E times in Labour run Manchester NHS".
This is the inevitable consequence of AGMA which dates back to 1986.
I'm basing it on how Labour treat their permanent fiefdoms as a local trough for party apparatchiks and family members. If I'm wrong feel free to correct me but I don't see any reason to see why Labour in Manchester would operate any differently to Labour in Glasgow.0 -
As the poster from Manchester said - it will be popular in Manchester - adjust your constituency voting appropriately.Casino_Royale said:
Tories. Changing something about NHS. Headline news. Words like 'reorganisation' and 'big change' pop up in it. Labour will misrepresent and weaponise. Labour will win the politics. And may even increase poll share.TGOHF said:
Not really - just the ownership of the budget being devolved.Casino_Royale said:BBC headline news. Why is the government tinkering with the NHS barely 80 days from a general election?
Regardless of its merits, it doesn't seem like smart politics to me.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31615218
"Greater Manchester is to become the first English region to get full control of its health spending, as part of an extension of devolved powers.
Chancellor George Osborne said the £6bn health and social care budget would be taken over by the region's councils and health groups."
Noone will care about or notice the details. The best thing the Tories can do is keep the NHS entirely out of the news and steer debate onto the economy. This is stupid.
Unless of course Osborne has concluded he won't win anyway and is just trying to make as many reforms he can in the little time he has left before the election. Which is in itself interesting.
Plus Labour will have to come out and moan against regional devolution - their fix for EVEL lies in tatters.0 -
A social peer group is the group of individuals to which you have a good degree of personal knowledge. His original claim was that he knew 300 peoples salary levels and inclination to be an MP. This would seem to fit well with the way a social peer group is defined (in terms of Salary level, it almost certainly goes well beyond the necessary definition).MarkHopkins said:Dair said:
Because empirical studies and human sociology are pretty well understood.Mortimer said:
Why do you think you, and a study you've read (and potentially misunderstood or misapplied) know more about my friends and acquaintances than I do?Dair said:
Why continue the lie?
I'm sure you felt it sounded quite impressive when you decided to invent the claim for your appeal to numbers. But it's still demonstrably false. You can meet thousands of people but your peer group at any one time will still never grow much higher than 20, and as stated, the average is below 12.
Interestingly, another of the consistent results of peer group studies is that people massively over-estimate the size of their own peer group.
You both probably need to provide your definition of "peer group".0 -
And do Tories salivate at the prospect of well paid jobs being carried out in the south east in their heart lands giving jobs to their public school chums so they can make all the decisions about northern cities hundreds of miles from those who know what's best for them?Dair said:
Just the Tories setting up another trap for Labour - not quite as good a trap as Better Together but still quite a nice one.Casino_Royale said:BBC headline news. Why is the government tinkering with the NHS barely 80 days from a general election?
Regardless of its merits, it doesn't seem like smart politics to me.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31615218
You can just picture the local grandees of Manchester Labour salivating at all the committee and oversight jobs they can award to their members and family members on six figure sums.
Meanwhile the Tories will get another Labour NHS to whack Andy Burnham over the head with "just LOOK at those appalling A&E times in Labour run Manchester NHS".0 -
Just saw the point of order where one MP was recorded as voting 'No' despite being a teller for 'Aye'... a bit shocking!0
-
GOsborneGenius (@GOsborneGenius)
25/02/2015 12:37
@matthancockmp Look at yourself during PMQ's, ugliness personified0 -
In terms of screwing the system for all they can personally gain from it, I suspect the Tories sights are set much higher.ManchesterKurt said:
And do Tories salivate at the prospect of well paid jobs being carried out in the south east in their heart lands giving jobs to their public school chums so they can make all the decisions about northern cities hundreds of miles from those who know what's best for them?Dair said:
Just the Tories setting up another trap for Labour - not quite as good a trap as Better Together but still quite a nice one.Casino_Royale said:BBC headline news. Why is the government tinkering with the NHS barely 80 days from a general election?
Regardless of its merits, it doesn't seem like smart politics to me.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31615218
You can just picture the local grandees of Manchester Labour salivating at all the committee and oversight jobs they can award to their members and family members on six figure sums.
Meanwhile the Tories will get another Labour NHS to whack Andy Burnham over the head with "just LOOK at those appalling A&E times in Labour run Manchester NHS".0 -
EVEL cannot work, Manchester and London MPs are akin to Scottish and Welsh MPs to varying degrees.TGOHF said:
As the poster from Manchester said - it will be popular in Manchester - adjust your constituency voting appropriately.Casino_Royale said:
Tories. Changing something about NHS. Headline news. Words like 'reorganisation' and 'big change' pop up in it. Labour will misrepresent and weaponise. Labour will win the politics. And may even increase poll share.TGOHF said:
Not really - just the ownership of the budget being devolved.Casino_Royale said:BBC headline news. Why is the government tinkering with the NHS barely 80 days from a general election?
Regardless of its merits, it doesn't seem like smart politics to me.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31615218
"Greater Manchester is to become the first English region to get full control of its health spending, as part of an extension of devolved powers.
Chancellor George Osborne said the £6bn health and social care budget would be taken over by the region's councils and health groups."
Noone will care about or notice the details. The best thing the Tories can do is keep the NHS entirely out of the news and steer debate onto the economy. This is stupid.
Unless of course Osborne has concluded he won't win anyway and is just trying to make as many reforms he can in the little time he has left before the election. Which is in itself interesting.
Plus Labour will have to come out and moan against regional devolution - their fix for EVEL lies in tatters.0 -
Why is this being posted here? It's only an insult about someones looks.isam said:GOsborneGenius (@GOsborneGenius)
25/02/2015 12:37
@matthancockmp Look at yourself during PMQ's, ugliness personified0 -
Kipper humour I think ? Dunno.RobD said:
Why is this being posted here? It's only an insult about someones looks.isam said:GOsborneGenius (@GOsborneGenius)
25/02/2015 12:37
@matthancockmp Look at yourself during PMQ's, ugliness personified0 -
isam said:
GOsborneGenius (@GOsborneGenius)
25/02/2015 12:37
@matthancockmp Look at yourself during PMQ's, ugliness personified <
Ukip the real nasty party.0 -
It would be interesting to know what the average salary is on pb. I get the feeling it's fairly high. If it's not intelligence or wisdom what is that leads someone to a high salary. Background will certainly play a part but some people just seem to have a drive to make money and be high earners in the way that others don't. And be happy with jobs that others might find boring. Maybe I'm just comforting myself as an underachiever that I could do it if I really wanted to.SouthamObserver said:
Of course it is. As is the idea that someone's salary is an indicator of their intelligence and wisdom.Jonathan said:
The idea that the current HOC represents the best this country has to offer or even just "great talent" is patently absurd.Richard_Nabavi said:
Yes, certainly I'm arguing that. I mean, you are clearly someone of great talent, but even you didn't make the grade!Jonathan said:Wow. Are you seriously arguing that the Commons is currently stuffed full of talent that would otherwise be lured away?
0 -
It's just a bit of banter.TGOHF said:
Kipper humour I think ? Dunno.RobD said:
Why is this being posted here? It's only an insult about someones looks.isam said:GOsborneGenius (@GOsborneGenius)
25/02/2015 12:37
@matthancockmp Look at yourself during PMQ's, ugliness personified0 -
@DPJHodges: Andy Burnham says he will scrap Manchester NHS devolution. http://t.co/cgmZFj50fg0
-
MEN now has Burnham saying he will scrap this devolution if Labour get in in May.ManchesterKurt said:
EVEL cannot work, Manchester and London MPs are akin to Scottish and Welsh MPs to varying degrees.TGOHF said:
As the poster from Manchester said - it will be popular in Manchester - adjust your constituency voting appropriately.Casino_Royale said:
Tories. Changing something about NHS. Headline news. Words like 'reorganisation' and 'big change' pop up in it. Labour will misrepresent and weaponise. Labour will win the politics. And may even increase poll share.TGOHF said:
Not really - just the ownership of the budget being devolved.Casino_Royale said:BBC headline news. Why is the government tinkering with the NHS barely 80 days from a general election?
Regardless of its merits, it doesn't seem like smart politics to me.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31615218
"Greater Manchester is to become the first English region to get full control of its health spending, as part of an extension of devolved powers.
Chancellor George Osborne said the £6bn health and social care budget would be taken over by the region's councils and health groups."
Noone will care about or notice the details. The best thing the Tories can do is keep the NHS entirely out of the news and steer debate onto the economy. This is stupid.
Unless of course Osborne has concluded he won't win anyway and is just trying to make as many reforms he can in the little time he has left before the election. Which is in itself interesting.
Plus Labour will have to come out and moan against regional devolution - their fix for EVEL lies in tatters.
0 -
You are Micky Flanagan and I claim my £5isam said:
I went when I was 35!weejonnie said:
I suspect that if you looked at the CVs of the lecturers you might find a slight left-wing bias. i.e. inherently against the USA.isam said:When I was eating lentil soup at Brighton Uni the lecturers there told the students that the American politicians that decided to invade Iraq all got a massive earner out of it as they had shares in Army equipment and bombmaking companies etc.. any truth in this?!
However we were all young once, so I assume you learned cynicism after leaving Uni.
Had a row, left after a year
Went in a Labour voter, left a UKIP member.. the bias was so extreme as to be sickening0 -
The claim was:Dair said:
Because empirical studies and human sociology are pretty well understood.Mortimer said:
Why do you think you, and a study you've read (and potentially misunderstood or misapplied) know more about my friends and acquaintances than I do?Dair said:
Why continue the lie?
I'm sure you felt it sounded quite impressive when you decided to invent the claim for your appeal to numbers. But it's still demonstrably false. You can meet thousands of people but your peer group at any one time will still never grow much higher than 20, and as stated, the average is below 12.
Interestingly, another of the consistent results of peer group studies is that people massively over-estimate the size of their own peer group.
"Of my group of 300 or so friends and acquaintances under 35 (mostly from state grammar school or Oxbridge colleges), 5 or 6 would entertain the idea of being an MP."
I find that entirely credible. I'd say 150 myself, but I don't get out much. I certainly wouldn't call the poster "a liar" if I thought it looked on the high side, nor make the ludicrous equation that peer group=people concerning whom one can estimate their likely wish to become an MP.
I assume that you are a passionate warmist on the basis of Ther Science, and have fewer than 12 friends.0 -
Apparently Ed Miliband has been airbrushed out of Labour's PPB tonight0
-
Johnson to stand in Kensington !
0 -
Oh dear.TGOHF said:
MEN now has Burnham saying he will scrap this devolution if Labour get in in May.ManchesterKurt said:
EVEL cannot work, Manchester and London MPs are akin to Scottish and Welsh MPs to varying degrees.TGOHF said:
As the poster from Manchester said - it will be popular in Manchester - adjust your constituency voting appropriately.Casino_Royale said:
Tories. Changing something about NHS. Headline news. Words like 'reorganisation' and 'big change' pop up in it. Labour will misrepresent and weaponise. Labour will win the politics. And may even increase poll share.TGOHF said:
Not really - just the ownership of the budget being devolved.Casino_Royale said:BBC headline news. Why is the government tinkering with the NHS barely 80 days from a general election?
Regardless of its merits, it doesn't seem like smart politics to me.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-31615218
"Greater Manchester is to become the first English region to get full control of its health spending, as part of an extension of devolved powers.
Chancellor George Osborne said the £6bn health and social care budget would be taken over by the region's councils and health groups."
Noone will care about or notice the details. The best thing the Tories can do is keep the NHS entirely out of the news and steer debate onto the economy. This is stupid.
Unless of course Osborne has concluded he won't win anyway and is just trying to make as many reforms he can in the little time he has left before the election. Which is in itself interesting.
Plus Labour will have to come out and moan against regional devolution - their fix for EVEL lies in tatters.
Labour don't want anyone to have local control over health budgets.0 -
-
McGovern should pay for costsCharles said:
Why didn't they charge him costs?Dair said:
From Wiki citingfrom the Telegraph: -DavidL said:Is there not an argument that MPs should be required to have a second job? Ministers etc could be exempt and so could Chairman of committees who want to be. Every other MP should be required to have some contact with the real world (and for the avoidance of doubt that would not include working for a political party). It would make the House a better place.
My MP, Jim McGovern, has no entries in the Register of Members interests. Why am I not surprised?
Also has Boris thought this through? If Ed actually brought this nonsense into force he could face a horrendous fall in his income.
"McGovern lost his appeal against the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority's rejection of a £23.90 single rail ticket from Dundee to Glasgow in April 2013.[3] The Sunday Herald reported that Parliamentary authorities determined that the detour was unconnected to McGovern's official work as an MP. He had been attending a Labour Party event in Glasgow. IPSA revealed that its bill for defending against McGovern's appeal was £27,000, to be met by the taxpayers."
Cream of the crop.
And who the f*ck authorised that expenditure by IPSA's lawyers?0 -
Given that he lost, you'd expect so.Pulpstar said:
McGovern should pay for costsCharles said:
Why didn't they charge him costs?Dair said:
From Wiki citingfrom the Telegraph: -DavidL said:Is there not an argument that MPs should be required to have a second job? Ministers etc could be exempt and so could Chairman of committees who want to be. Every other MP should be required to have some contact with the real world (and for the avoidance of doubt that would not include working for a political party). It would make the House a better place.
My MP, Jim McGovern, has no entries in the Register of Members interests. Why am I not surprised?
Also has Boris thought this through? If Ed actually brought this nonsense into force he could face a horrendous fall in his income.
"McGovern lost his appeal against the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority's rejection of a £23.90 single rail ticket from Dundee to Glasgow in April 2013.[3] The Sunday Herald reported that Parliamentary authorities determined that the detour was unconnected to McGovern's official work as an MP. He had been attending a Labour Party event in Glasgow. IPSA revealed that its bill for defending against McGovern's appeal was £27,000, to be met by the taxpayers."
Cream of the crop.
And who the f*ck authorised that expenditure by IPSA's lawyers?0 -
Boris is in Uxbridge, surely?0
-
PBtory shows sign of Getting It shock.TGOHF said:Dan Hodges @DPJHodges · 8m 8 minutes ago
Guardian on Bradford: "It was claimed the clan elders were unhappy their favoured candidate had not made the shortlist". 2015. Clan elders.0 -
-
281 MPs have 2 or more jobs.
Wonder what the party split is?0 -
The Andy Burnham MEN article
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/health/andy-burnhams-warning-over-swiss-cheese-8721228
Note he doesn't say he would scrap, rather he would not have offered it.
Far from the same thing.0 -
Article appears to have changed - "would not be on the table" was the previous quote.ManchesterKurt said:The Andy Burnham MEN article
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/health/andy-burnhams-warning-over-swiss-cheese-8721228
Note he doesn't say he would scrap, rather he would not have offered it.
Far from the same thing.0 -
Still has would not be in table in article, point is though it will not need to be in table as well have already been assigned up to and agreed.TGOHF said:
Article appears to have changed - "would not be on the table" was the previous quote.ManchesterKurt said:The Andy Burnham MEN article
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/health/andy-burnhams-warning-over-swiss-cheese-8721228
Note he doesn't say he would scrap, rather he would not have offered it.
Far from the same thing.0 -
281 MPs earned over £7m
So thats £25k on average.
Tessa Munt giving a good speech about being an MP is a F/T job full stop.0 -
Can the Lab. motion get passed tonight?
Seems LDs appear to be in favour.0 -
Mr. Owls, really? How can some people be MPs and also Cabinet ministers if they have no time left after their MP duties?
Mr. X, well, quite. It's horrendously backward, if accurate.0 -
Out of interest in terms of the "exceptions for doctors and lawyers", have these professions not been required to instigate Returners courses to allow easier access for women to return to their respective professions after some years out for starting families?0
-
I'm strongly opposed to MPs being banned from taking second jobs on two grounds:
1) The decision should be left to their electorate. If they don't like their MP having a second job, they have the option of booting that MP out.
2) A House of Commons that had no one with any current experience of life outside the House would be even fuller of out-of-touch weirdos.0 -
Indeed, Mr. Antifrank.0
-
That's the Tessa Munt who's a school governor, right?bigjohnowls said:Tessa Munt giving a good speech about being an MP is a F/T job full stop.
0 -
There's a stronger argument that MP's *should* have second jobs, for the latter reason.antifrank said:I'm strongly opposed to MPs being banned from taking second jobs on two grounds:
1) The decision should be left to their electorate. If they don't like their MP having a second job, they have the option of booting that MP out.
2) A House of Commons that had no one with any current experience of life outside the House would be even fuller of out-of-touch weirdos.0 -
What is wrong with a cap on outside earnings?0
-
Not very bright, is she.Richard_Nabavi said:
That's the Tessa Munt who's a school governor, right?bigjohnowls said:Tessa Munt giving a good speech about being an MP is a F/T job full stop.
0 -
That's going a bit too far. Some of them seem otherwise unemployable, and I'm not in favour of a jobs guarantee.TheWatcher said:
There's a stronger argument that MP's *should* have second jobs, for the latter reason.antifrank said:I'm strongly opposed to MPs being banned from taking second jobs on two grounds:
1) The decision should be left to their electorate. If they don't like their MP having a second job, they have the option of booting that MP out.
2) A House of Commons that had no one with any current experience of life outside the House would be even fuller of out-of-touch weirdos.0 -
The problem with that is you can apply that logic to anything. Let them do whatever they want.antifrank said:I'm strongly opposed to MPs being banned from taking second jobs on two grounds:
1) The decision should be left to their electorate. If they don't like their MP having a second job, they have the option of booting that MP out.
(2) That is pure speculation. The only thing we know for sure is that the status-quo, where MPs can have second jobs, does not solve that problem.antifrank said:
2) A House of Commons that had no one with any current experience of life outside the House would be even fuller of out-of-touch weirdos.0 -
Parasites...?ManchesterKurt said:The locals in Manchester have been desperate for devolved powers on numerous issues, this will go down well here.
Forget your EVEL stuff though, Manc MPs are now similar to Welsh and Scottish ones.0 -
Would rule out boxers as MPs - one fight a year would put them over the limit.bigjohnowls said:What is wrong with a cap on outside earnings?
Oh wait - boxers are "working class" - so no issue - move on..0 -
It's a good way of rooting out the deadwood, and downright crap ones then. If they're incapable of getting a job outside the HoC, do we really want them passing legislation etc?antifrank said:
That's going a bit too far. Some of them seem otherwise unemployable, and I'm not in favour of a jobs guarantee.TheWatcher said:
There's a stronger argument that MP's *should* have second jobs, for the latter reason.antifrank said:I'm strongly opposed to MPs being banned from taking second jobs on two grounds:
1) The decision should be left to their electorate. If they don't like their MP having a second job, they have the option of booting that MP out.
2) A House of Commons that had no one with any current experience of life outside the House would be even fuller of out-of-touch weirdos.0
