politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Marf on MPs with 2 jobs
Comments
-
Yet when I suggest that MPs need certification to show competence, somehow everyone gets all squeamish.Jonathan said:
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.0 -
@DPJHodges: Labour car crash on NHS devolution. And Burnham says he opposes. Ed Balls says he'll role it out nationally.0
-
He might have a case that they are entirely disproportionate.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?
It is another point that, in my view, IPSA is a monstrosity.0 -
I believe she has an IQ of 138!!!!TheWatcher said:
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 -
We should have a full cross-section of society, including morons.TheWatcher said:
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 -
If that's the alternative, I might even run myself!TheWatcher said:
(if my wife is reading this - that was a joke. I'm not going to get involved in politics)0 -
Surprised you don't recognise the style... Lets just say it's an old friend...TheWatcher said:
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 -
Wrong... AgainTGOHF 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 -
SquareRoot said:
Ooh you fiendisam said:GOsborneGenius (@GOsborneGenius)
25/02/2015 12:37
@matthancockmp Look at yourself during PMQ's, ugliness personified <
Ukip the real nasty party.
Wrong0 -
That must have been measured under the pre-Gove Ofsted standards.bigjohnowls said:
I believe she has an IQ of 138!!!!TheWatcher said:
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 -
Mr. Owls, can't judge someone by their IQ.
Well, you can but you really shouldn't.0 -
Ah ha. PBUH.isam said:
Surprised you don't recognise the style... Lets just say it's an old friend...TheWatcher said:
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 -
This is brilliant..'targeting ethnic minorities"
Haha could they be more wrong????
Christopher Snowdon (@cjsnowdon)
25/02/2015 18:02
Desperate PR non-story of the day - > Betting chain that Farage once represented is targeting immigrants i100.io/C5gudGF0 -
I strongly object to MPs having second jobs.
(1) Legislation does not get enough scrutiny, it is a full-time, often boring, job.*
(2) It actively encourages conflicts of interests
(3) It enables individuals to stay in Parliament when they are no longer interested in the work of an MP.
* If they have spare time, repeal outdated laws.0 -
It's got to be Coleman for Kensington.Charles said:
If that's the alternative, I might even run myself!TheWatcher said:
(if my wife is reading this - that was a joke. I'm not going to get involved in politics)0 -
the tweeter not the tweet ? Looks like the Dastardly Dubai Drudger. Poster of the year candidate - I kids you not.isam said:
Wrong... AgainTGOHF 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 -
We could let MP's do second jobs as members of the crown prosecution service. Though an extra 650 working on the case against Cliff Richard is beginning to sound inadequate0
-
I'd like to see the breakdown of both the detail of McGovern's appeal and the IPSA costs. If he's made a completely frivolous appeal and lawyered it up to the eyeballs Damn right he should pay. But would like to see what precisely the case put for and against was.Charles said:
He might have a case that they are entirely disproportionate.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?
It is another point that, in my view, IPSA is a monstrosity.
0 -
It shouldn't take too many man hours to decide that Millennium Prayer was a crime against music.Roger said:We could let MP's do second jobs as members of the crown prosecution service. Though an extra 650 working on the case against Cliff Richard is beginning to sound inadequate
0 -
Anyone think this vote at 7pm tonight will be very close?0
-
Maybe if MPS have enough time to do other jobs they should have less staff/SPADs and do more of their own paper work and get the salary of those they replace?0
-
Barnet suffered him for years, it's only fair he's shared around.Sean_F said:
It's got to be Coleman for Kensington.Charles said:
If that's the alternative, I might even run myself!TheWatcher said:
(if my wife is reading this - that was a joke. I'm not going to get involved in politics)
0 -
0
-
Yawn.bigjohnowls said:
Where do you stand on the Manc health devolution BJO - are you for it like Balls or against it like Burnham ?
0 -
So your wife reads PB Charles? InterestingCharles said:
If that's the alternative, I might even run myself!TheWatcher said:
(if my wife is reading this - that was a joke. I'm not going to get involved in politics)
0 -
Matthew Goodwin UKIP GE prediction.
On an average day...
Vote share: 10.5-11%
Seats: Clacton, Rochester and Strood, Thanet South, Thurrock, Castle Point, and either Great Grimsby or Boston and Skegness.
on a good day...
Dudley North, Rotherham
2nd place in 70-ish seats in the North.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/redbox/topic/2015-election-campaign/watch-isabel-hardman-lindsay-mcintosh-matthew-goodwin-and-sean-kemp-debate-minority-parties/summary
0 -
It looks as if they're following your suggestion.Roger said:We could let MP's do second jobs as members of the crown prosecution service. Though an extra 650 working on the case against Cliff Richard is beginning to sound inadequate
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2968942/Historical-sex-offence-inquiry-Cliff-Richard-expanded-significantly-say-police.html0 -
It's probably safest to work on the assumption that one's wife might read it..MikeSmithson said:So your wife reads PB Charles? Interesting
0 -
Has Geoffrey Cox managed to get any sleep over the last year ?
1903 hours and a full time MP he's worked hard.0 -
I think like the Better Care Fund it is potentially a way of stealing NHS money to give to hard pressed councils, unless unlike the BCF it is ring fenced for careTGOHF said:
Yawn.bigjohnowls said:
Where do you stand on the Manc health devolution BJO - are you for it like Balls or against it like Burnham ?
No doubt that the integration of care is good for the patient but if the person who decides how the money is spent has a conflict of interest (as looks to me to be the case with this scheme) then that will not result in the best use of health resource. and the patient will not get bettercare.
In summary I reckon it is not the best way to integrate care. But integrating care is important going forward.
0 -
Is it a blog you would even wish your wife or your servants to read?Richard_Nabavi said:
It's probably safest to work on the assumption that one's wife might read it..MikeSmithson said:So your wife reads PB Charles? Interesting
0 -
Just seen the Labour PPB. Strangely flat voice. No Ed which I suppose was to be expected and far too many messages. They're best with just one. 4/100
-
Not when TSE is aroundNeil said:
Is it a blog you would even wish your wife or your servants to read?Richard_Nabavi said:
It's probably safest to work on the assumption that one's wife might read it..MikeSmithson said:So your wife reads PB Charles? Interesting
0 -
A real policy aimed at trying to join up health and social care and to devolve not create top down reform.Scott_P said:@DPJHodges: Labour car crash on NHS devolution. And Burnham says he opposes. Ed Balls says he'll role it out nationally.
It part of a real policy to allow the Manchester area for starters to evolve their services infrastructure and local government.
Meantime the steady dribble from sad inadequates continues with their pretend affront at politicians.0 -
Wonder if MPs will vote to restrict their earnings
Have Turkeys ever voted for christmas
I reckon this will run for the next 11 weeks though0 -
The enormo-haddock enjoy pb.com, although they do think that Mr. Madasafish's username is a bit racist.0
-
@Morris_Dance: 'piscist', surely0
-
Anyone recognize the VO in Labour's broadcast?0
-
Jury system.antifrank said:
We should have a full cross-section of society, including morons.TheWatcher said:
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 -
Weaponising 'Director' - an interesting ploy.
There are around 3 million companies registered in the UK, many of them small businesses. That's a lot of people to demonise.0 -
If the main social care provider is also the Commissioner. It creates a huge conflict of interest It has exactly the same flaw as per the Health and Social Care Act and the BCF IMO.Flightpath said:
A real policy aimed at trying to join up health and social care and to devolve not create top down reform.Scott_P said:@DPJHodges: Labour car crash on NHS devolution. And Burnham says he opposes. Ed Balls says he'll role it out nationally.
It part of a real policy to allow the Manchester area for starters to evolve their services infrastructure and local government.
Meantime the steady dribble from sad inadequates continues with their pretend affront at politicians.0 -
So Rifkind is gone, pity there won't be a byelection.0
-
Cladist. Or, as we are talking about "fish", pseudocladist.Richard_Nabavi said:@Morris_Dance: 'piscist', surely
0 -
I agree with antifrank that MPs should not be banned from second jobs, as it's the sort of thing that voters should have the final say on, rather than creating a variety of bureaucratic means by which an MP can be harassed by the Executive.
I also agree with Jonathan, that MPs don't spend enough time as it is scrutinising legislation, and I find it hard to imagine how they would be able to do their job of holding the Executive to account properly at the same time as holding down a second job.0 -
''Forget your EVEL stuff though, Manc MPs are now similar to Welsh and Scottish ones.''
How? NW MPs are English and vote on the English NHS budget. They vote on the overall budget like all MPs. The NW MPs would have a duty to see the local devolved authority spends wisely and responsibly but the money one assumes would be spent with local responsibilities in mind.
We should bear in mind though that some services are national commissioned ones because of the nature of the service, so it may be that not all services ought to be devolved either to trusts or wider groups like this.
0 -
I was brought up to believe every fish has its plaice in society and it is wrong to speak eel of those floundering at the bottom...Morris_Dancer said:The enormo-haddock enjoy pb.com, although they do think that Mr. Madasafish's username is a bit racist.
0 -
I agree with thatFlightpath said:''Forget your EVEL stuff though, Manc MPs are now similar to Welsh and Scottish ones.''
How? NW MPs are English and vote on the English NHS budget. They vote on the overall budget like all MPs. The NW MPs would have a duty to see the local devolved authority spends wisely and responsibly but the money one assumes would be spent with local responsibilities in mind.
We should bear in mind though that some services are national commissioned ones because of the nature of the service, so it may be that not all services ought to be devolved either to trusts or wider groups like this.0 -
Plus several million partners and proprietors; i.e., unregistered businesses.TheWatcher said:Weaponising 'Director' - an interesting ploy.
There are around 3 million companies registered in the UK, many of them small businesses. That's a lot of people to demonise.0 -
It is shocking that a criminal investigation is being played out in the media before any arrest has taken place. I have no idea whether Cliff Richard has committed any crime. I do know that he should not have his reputation dragged through the gutter without having any way of answering the accusations which have apparently been made against him.Roger said:Antifrank
Britain's most wanted.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cA5QJS3paAo0 -
They could spend more time scrutinising legislation if we didn't have successive governments who create huge reams of unnecessary legislation.OblitusSumMe said:I agree with antifrank that MPs should not be banned from second jobs, as it's the sort of thing that voters should have the final say on, rather than creating a variety of bureaucratic means by which an MP can be harassed by the Executive.
I also agree with Jonathan, that MPs don't spend enough time as it is scrutinising legislation, and I find it hard to imagine how they would be able to do their job of holding the Executive to account properly at the same time as holding down a second job.0 -
He might give one's wife some interesting ideas.Richard_Nabavi said:
Not when TSE is aroundNeil said:
Is it a blog you would even wish your wife or your servants to read?Richard_Nabavi said:
It's probably safest to work on the assumption that one's wife might read it..MikeSmithson said:So your wife reads PB Charles? Interesting
0 -
Roll or rule?Scott_P said:@DPJHodges: Labour car crash on NHS devolution. And Burnham says he opposes. Ed Balls says he'll role it out nationally.
0 -
What did I ever do to you?Sean_F said:
It's got to be Coleman for Kensington.Charles said:
If that's the alternative, I might even run myself!TheWatcher said:
(if my wife is reading this - that was a joke. I'm not going to get involved in politics)0 -
Balls is now so plump, he probably meant 'roll about nationally'.JohnLilburne said:
Roll or rule?Scott_P said:@DPJHodges: Labour car crash on NHS devolution. And Burnham says he opposes. Ed Balls says he'll role it out nationally.
0 -
Thats the issue. Labour dont know....JohnLilburne said:
Roll or rule?Scott_P said:@DPJHodges: Labour car crash on NHS devolution. And Burnham says he opposes. Ed Balls says he'll role it out nationally.
0 -
(1) We need less legislation, not more. Being an MP should be a part time job*. Alternatively, It should be easier for MPs to pass their own legislation without it being Government sponsored.Jonathan said:I strongly object to MPs having second jobs.
(1) Legislation does not get enough scrutiny, it is a full-time, often boring, job.*
(2) It actively encourages conflicts of interests
(3) It enables individuals to stay in Parliament when they are no longer interested in the work of an MP.
* If they have spare time, repeal outdated laws.
(2) Our constitution allows, even demands, MPs to be Government ministers, which is clearly the biggest conflict of interest there is. And many second jobs will not be conflicts of interest.
(3) it allows good people to not have to leave Parliament to make decent money. Thus saving the taxpayer money.
* as is shown by the fact that you can be a Government minister and an MP at the same time.
0 -
Mothers very upset about the news Re. Sir Cliff...Roger said:Antifrank
Britain's most wanted.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cA5QJS3paAo
0 -
The two Labour PPCs who suddenly stepped down this week, were councillors. If they had been successful in May 2015, would they have resigned their posts as councillors?0
-
Just For Fun:
YouGov Prediction - Con Lead 1%0 -
He's not been arrested or charged. For the police to make such a noise about it, tipping off journalists etc to the raid shows a remarkable lack of forsight as to how cases can be dismissed from the courts etc.antifrank said:
It is shocking that a criminal investigation is being played out in the media before any arrest has taken place. I have no idea whether Cliff Richard has committed any crime. I do know that he should not have his reputation dragged through the gutter without having any way of answering the accusations which have apparently been made against him.Roger said:Antifrank
Britain's most wanted.....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cA5QJS3paAo0 -
OSM
"I also agree with Jonathan, that MPs don't spend enough time as it is scrutinising legislation, and I find it hard to imagine how they would be able to do their job of holding the Executive to account properly at the same time as holding down a second job."
I've just seen Tom Bradbury try to explain why stopping MP's having second jobs is impossible "What happens if they are running a family business do they have to sell it and what if they reinvest the money and it makes a profit" Sometimes you see someone and genuinely wonder what sort of nepotism got them the job.
Think Tom if your full time researcher wanted to moonlight working as Sylvester Stallone's driver. How would you deal with it? I never watch ITV. It's news for morons....0 -
I'm a bit confused, I thought Labour were all for devolution of power to places like Manchester and also the combining of health and social care, but I read Burnham will now cancel this?
Is it wrong type of devolution or something?0 -
(1) We need better legislationJohnLilburne said:
(1) We need less legislation, not more. Being an MP should be a part time job*. Alternatively, It should be easier for MPs to pass their own legislation without it being Government sponsored.Jonathan said:I strongly object to MPs having second jobs.
(1) Legislation does not get enough scrutiny, it is a full-time, often boring, job.*
(2) It actively encourages conflicts of interests
(3) It enables individuals to stay in Parliament when they are no longer interested in the work of an MP.
* If they have spare time, repeal outdated laws.
(2) Our constitution allows, even demands, MPs to be Government ministers, which is clearly the biggest conflict of interest there is. And many second jobs will not be conflicts of interest.
(3) it allows good people to not have to leave Parliament to make decent money. Thus saving the taxpayer money.
* as is shown by the fact that you can be a Government minister and an MP at the same time.
(2) A combined executive means more work for other MPs and reliance on whips. We need full time MPs to hold the executive to account.
(3) £67,000 is decent money
0 -
South Yorkshire Police should probably just be disbanded and run by West Yorkshire or some such, it's a national embarrasment.0
-
ok, here's a thing I do not understand about this Manchester health announcement.
BBC are presenting as if Greater Manchester is getting control of the WHOLE NHS budget. But then they refer to "health and social care". So is this actually about joining up the NHS and council parts of health and social care i.e. the Better Care Fund? If it is, then this is a non-story surely, as some form of joining up health and social care is due in every area of England.0 -
Neat twitter fact (I have no idea whether it's true, but what the hell):
James Chapman (Mail) @jameschappers · 1m1 minute ago
1/50 adult Scots has joined SNP since referendum. Party has more members than British army has soldiers. @alexmassie in @spectator #GE20150 -
Why is Osborne talking about health and social care instead of apologising for failing to meet his promise of eliminating the deficit by the end of this parliament?0
-
Along with now regularly reading Wings over Scotland and ScotgoesPop and keeping a close eye on Yougov subsamples this is the sort of fact I like to hear.antifrank said:Neat twitter fact (I have no idea whether it's true, but what the hell):
James Chapman (Mail) @jameschappers · 1m1 minute ago
1/50 adult Scots has joined SNP since referendum. Party has more members than British army has soldiers. @alexmassie in @spectator #GE2015
Let me know if it's all about to go wrong :@)0 -
Plus its called 'government'. Its what politicians do. And its a fairly wise policy. it is allowing powers to evolve. its allowing local ;powers to evolve, not be imposed. It may not work, certainly not straight out of the box - but given the need, the common sense in liking health and social care, it makes sense to roll it out on a limited scale and learn from the experience. And it would make sense to do it locally.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:
...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.
I have to say I find it pretty disgusting that the people who decry politicians for dissembling and deviousness and avoiding problems and being self serving blah blah blah... are the same people who suggest they should in fact shut up and say and do nothing... because it might make life difficult.
The devolution of powers to places like Manchester and the creation of a regional Manchester-Leeds 'powerhouse' has been on Osborne idea for some time. This is just a continuation of it. He has gone on record about devolving things like business rates as well.
http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30730632
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/04/george-osborne-northern-powerhouse-2015-election-devolution
The Guardian is suspicious but thinks the idea is a good one. Certainly far from being desperate it makes good politics (if we want to think about base things like politics) for the Conservative Party in the North.
0 -
Years ago I heard it said that the Texas Legislature sits for no more than 6 weeks each year so that the legislators get up to the minimum interference in citizens' lives. No idea of the truth of this.JohnLilburne said:
(1) We need less legislation, not more. Being an MP should be a part time job*. Alternatively, It should be easier for MPs to pass their own legislation without it being Government sponsored.Jonathan said:I strongly object to MPs having second jobs.
(1) Legislation does not get enough scrutiny, it is a full-time, often boring, job.*
(2) It actively encourages conflicts of interests
(3) It enables individuals to stay in Parliament when they are no longer interested in the work of an MP.
* If they have spare time, repeal outdated laws.
(2) Our constitution allows, even demands, MPs to be Government ministers, which is clearly the biggest conflict of interest there is. And many second jobs will not be conflicts of interest.
(3) it allows good people to not have to leave Parliament to make decent money. Thus saving the taxpayer money.
* as is shown by the fact that you can be a Government minister and an MP at the same time.
0 -
Watching Channel 4 it appears that it is indeed the whole of the NHS budget for the area and they already have control over the Social Care budget at a local level. So it is far more than the Better Care Fund, it is the NHS budget in total which will then be combined with te eSocial Care budget. Channel 4 are quoting £6 billion of spending moving under local control.MrsB said:ok, here's a thing I do not understand about this Manchester health announcement.
BBC are presenting as if Greater Manchester is getting control of the WHOLE NHS budget. But then they refer to "health and social care". So is this actually about joining up the NHS and council parts of health and social care i.e. the Better Care Fund? If it is, then this is a non-story surely, as some form of joining up health and social care is due in every area of England.0 -
Good evening all from Tel-Aviv.
I'm spending a few days here - back next week - on an early spring holiday.
Pleased to be spending a few days away from the eabating heat. Politics here is as lunatic as normal - for a system dreampt up in pre-war eastern europe - and I couldn't care less.
I wont be contacting PB unless something exciting happens while I'm here. Cheers!0 -
minceMortimer 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...0 -
http://gawker.com/5855697/the-biological-reason-you-have-too-many-facebook-friendsmalcolmg said:
minceMortimer 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...0 -
(1) hard to disagree with that, although I think less = better.Jonathan said:
(1) We need better legislationJohnLilburne said:
(1) We need less legislation, not more. Being an MP should be a part time job*. Alternatively, It should be easier for MPs to pass their own legislation without it being Government sponsored.Jonathan said:I strongly object to MPs having second jobs.
(1) Legislation does not get enough scrutiny, it is a full-time, often boring, job.*
(2) It actively encourages conflicts of interests
(3) It enables individuals to stay in Parliament when they are no longer interested in the work of an MP.
* If they have spare time, repeal outdated laws.
(2) Our constitution allows, even demands, MPs to be Government ministers, which is clearly the biggest conflict of interest there is. And many second jobs will not be conflicts of interest.
(3) it allows good people to not have to leave Parliament to make decent money. Thus saving the taxpayer money.
* as is shown by the fact that you can be a Government minister and an MP at the same time.
(2) A combined executive means more work for other MPs and reliance on whips. We need full time MPs to hold the executive to account.
(3) £67,000 is decent money
(2) are you saying we should have separation of powers as in the USA? If so I agree with you.
(3) a lot of people can earn a lot more than that, and assuming they are in some way good, competent people, we would be in danger of losing them from politics
0 -
Shit, that probably means invasion is out of the question.antifrank said:Neat twitter fact (I have no idea whether it's true, but what the hell):
James Chapman (Mail) @jameschappers · 1m1 minute ago
1/50 adult Scots has joined SNP since referendum. Party has more members than British army has soldiers. @alexmassie in @spectator #GE2015
0 -
MPs having employment outside of their role is I think, on balance, something that we should avoid. What ever that employment may be there is the potential for a conflict of interest. Sponsorship by trade unions counts in this, and is actually even more ugly than most of the cases of company employment.
It seems to me that if a candidate wishes to stand as a "Tory, but paid by MegaCo" then that tells the voters where he stands - and equally if a Labour candidate stood as "Labour but paid by Unite".
Now there's an argument that if you don't allow people these outside interests then you'll fail to get the best people in parliament. It's just not true though - the best people aren't in parliament in the first place, and outside interests (such as second jobs) earn MPs so little as to be worthless. (Well, so they claim).
Allegedly the real benefits come from writing newspaper articles and books and the like. Perhaps speaking at events too. Mandelson (for example) seems to have turned this route into an astonishing pile of cash with no apparent effort whatsoever. (Not that many speeches, risible books, and trashy newspaper articles).
0 -
With or without Turnips?malcolmg said:
minceMortimer 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...
0 -
I agree that £67,000 is a decent wage. I am not so convinced it is the sort of money we should be paying to the people whose job is to govern our country.Jonathan said:
(1) We need better legislationJohnLilburne said:
(1) We need less legislation, not more. Being an MP should be a part time job*. Alternatively, It should be easier for MPs to pass their own legislation without it being Government sponsored.Jonathan said:I strongly object to MPs having second jobs.
(1) Legislation does not get enough scrutiny, it is a full-time, often boring, job.*
(2) It actively encourages conflicts of interests
(3) It enables individuals to stay in Parliament when they are no longer interested in the work of an MP.
* If they have spare time, repeal outdated laws.
(2) Our constitution allows, even demands, MPs to be Government ministers, which is clearly the biggest conflict of interest there is. And many second jobs will not be conflicts of interest.
(3) it allows good people to not have to leave Parliament to make decent money. Thus saving the taxpayer money.
* as is shown by the fact that you can be a Government minister and an MP at the same time.
(2) A combined executive means more work for other MPs and reliance on whips. We need full time MPs to hold the executive to account.
(3) £67,000 is decent money
What I am really not convinced of is that 5 years earnings of £67,000 is sufficient incentive for those following a career path or running their own businesses to give that all up and effectively throw it away (if you are going to ban second jobs) which is what you are asking them to do when they become an MP.0 -
Off to bedGIN1138 said:Just For Fun:
YouGov Prediction - Con Lead 1%
GIN is on a roll with his predictions. So Tory 1% lead nailed on.
Or is it on a role could someone help please!!0 -
I think being a Westminster MP was unpaid until ~1911. Minsters were paid though.perdix said:
Years ago I heard it said that the Texas Legislature sits for no more than 6 weeks each year so that the legislators get up to the minimum interference in citizens' lives. No idea of the truth of this.JohnLilburne said:
(1) We need less legislation, not more. Being an MP should be a part time job*. Alternatively, It should be easier for MPs to pass their own legislation without it being Government sponsored.Jonathan said:I strongly object to MPs having second jobs.
(1) Legislation does not get enough scrutiny, it is a full-time, often boring, job.*
(2) It actively encourages conflicts of interests
(3) It enables individuals to stay in Parliament when they are no longer interested in the work of an MP.
* If they have spare time, repeal outdated laws.
(2) Our constitution allows, even demands, MPs to be Government ministers, which is clearly the biggest conflict of interest there is. And many second jobs will not be conflicts of interest.
(3) it allows good people to not have to leave Parliament to make decent money. Thus saving the taxpayer money.
* as is shown by the fact that you can be a Government minister and an MP at the same time.
----
US State systems.
http://www.ncsl.org/research/about-state-legislatures/full-and-part-time-legislatures.aspx
0 -
Poor Tim is losing his mind on twitter over Osborne's announcement. Politicos are getting all sorts of tweets fired at them.0
-
You can join the SNP for precisely £1JohnLilburne said:
Shit, that probably means invasion is out of the question.antifrank said:Neat twitter fact (I have no idea whether it's true, but what the hell):
James Chapman (Mail) @jameschappers · 1m1 minute ago
1/50 adult Scots has joined SNP since referendum. Party has more members than British army has soldiers. @alexmassie in @spectator #GE2015
0 -
The provider of part of that care is now the Commissioner of all of it.Richard_Tyndall said:
Watching Channel 4 it appears that it is indeed the whole of the NHS budget for the area and they already have control over the Social Care budget at a local level. So it is far more than the Better Care Fund, it is the NHS budget in total which will then be combined with te eSocial Care budget. Channel 4 are quoting £6 billion of spending moving under local control.MrsB said:ok, here's a thing I do not understand about this Manchester health announcement.
BBC are presenting as if Greater Manchester is getting control of the WHOLE NHS budget. But then they refer to "health and social care". So is this actually about joining up the NHS and council parts of health and social care i.e. the Better Care Fund? If it is, then this is a non-story surely, as some form of joining up health and social care is due in every area of England.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
0 -
nice one, and trueantifrank said:
http://gawker.com/5855697/the-biological-reason-you-have-too-many-facebook-friendsmalcolmg said:
minceMortimer 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...0 -
Which Tim ?FrancisUrquhart said:Poor Tim is losing his mind on twitter over Osborne's announcement. Politicos are getting all sorts of tweets fired at them.
0 -
Link?FrancisUrquhart said:Poor Tim is losing his mind on twitter over Osborne's announcement. Politicos are getting all sorts of tweets fired at them.
0 -
Quite so - Today, South Yorkshire Police have announced via Aunty that the investigation has "increased significantly in size" and involves "more than one allegation" – a meaningless announcement imho.antifrank said:
It is shocking that a criminal investigation is being played out in the media before any arrest has taken place. I have no idea whether Cliff Richard has committed any crime. I do know that he should not have his reputation dragged through the gutter without having any way of answering the accusations which have apparently been made against him.Roger said:Antifrank
No doubt SYP and Aunty are still smarting from yesterday’s scathing report into Sir Cliff’s privacy violation.
0 -
LOL, tatties and turnipEastwinger said:
With or without Turnips?malcolmg said:
minceMortimer 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...0 -
To be honest John I have no idea if this is a good idea or not as I have not looked at the details and don't have any experience in healthcare or social service provision. All I was doing was pointing out what had been said on C4.bigjohnowls said:
The provider of part of that care is now the Commissioner of all of it.Richard_Tyndall said:
Watching Channel 4 it appears that it is indeed the whole of the NHS budget for the area and they already have control over the Social Care budget at a local level. So it is far more than the Better Care Fund, it is the NHS budget in total which will then be combined with te eSocial Care budget. Channel 4 are quoting £6 billion of spending moving under local control.MrsB said:ok, here's a thing I do not understand about this Manchester health announcement.
BBC are presenting as if Greater Manchester is getting control of the WHOLE NHS budget. But then they refer to "health and social care". So is this actually about joining up the NHS and council parts of health and social care i.e. the Better Care Fund? If it is, then this is a non-story surely, as some form of joining up health and social care is due in every area of England.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST0 -
(1) That is most often because the government manipulates the timetable to avoid it. The Blair and Brown governments were as guilty as any refusing to allow Parliament to debate issues properly.Jonathan said:I strongly object to MPs having second jobs.
(1) Legislation does not get enough scrutiny, it is a full-time, often boring, job.*
(2) It actively encourages conflicts of interests
(3) It enables individuals to stay in Parliament when they are no longer interested in the work of an MP.
* If they have spare time, repeal outdated laws.
(2) There is no greater conflict of interest than the party leadership of the Governing party using jobs in government as motivation to MP's to toe the Government line.
(3) Utter nonsense. If MPs are not doing their jobs surely their voters would get rid of them. Why would they stay in Parliament when likely they can earn a better living outside. If anything the only reason to remain in Parliament once you've lost interest is the soon to be £75,000k pocket money, the subsidised bars and restaurants, the access Westminster provides, the gold plated pension arrangements, the lavish tax free expenses and the cushy conditions of work which as Rifkind pointed out allows an MP plenty of free time.
However, all this taken into consideration there is one reason above all others why we must have diversity in Westminster and allow 2nd jobs. The thought of having 650 short sighted narrow minded intolerant self serving narcissistic Ed Miliband clones who have never had a real job in their lives is utterly terrifying and a recipe for disaster!0 -
Bit economical there Mike, minimum is £1 per month , perhaps you were thinking of Scottish Labour offer recently.MikeSmithson said:
You can join the SNP for precisely £1JohnLilburne said:
Shit, that probably means invasion is out of the question.antifrank said:Neat twitter fact (I have no idea whether it's true, but what the hell):
James Chapman (Mail) @jameschappers · 1m1 minute ago
1/50 adult Scots has joined SNP since referendum. Party has more members than British army has soldiers. @alexmassie in @spectator #GE20150 -
(1) In my experience, you need to work harder to be more concise. Verbose legislation is the result of weak scrutiny. If MPs were forced to read the stuff, it would be better written.JohnLilburne said:
(1) hard to disagree with that, although I think less = better.Jonathan said:
(1) We need better legislationJohnLilburne said:
(1) We need less legislation, not more. Being an MP should be a part time job*. Alternatively, It should be easier for MPs to pass their own legislation without it being Government sponsored.Jonathan said:I strongly object to MPs having second jobs.
(1) Legislation does not get enough scrutiny, it is a full-time, often boring, job.*
(2) It actively encourages conflicts of interests
(3) It enables individuals to stay in Parliament when they are no longer interested in the work of an MP.
* If they have spare time, repeal outdated laws.
(2) Our constitution allows, even demands, MPs to be Government ministers, which is clearly the biggest conflict of interest there is. And many second jobs will not be conflicts of interest.
(3) it allows good people to not have to leave Parliament to make decent money. Thus saving the taxpayer money.
* as is shown by the fact that you can be a Government minister and an MP at the same time.
(2) A combined executive means more work for other MPs and reliance on whips. We need full time MPs to hold the executive to account.
(3) £67,000 is decent money
(2) are you saying we should have separation of powers as in the USA? If so I agree with you.
(3) a lot of people can earn a lot more than that, and assuming they are in some way good, competent people, we would be in danger of losing them from politics
(2) I am not against it in principle, but can't see us getting smoothly from here to there.
(3) Yes, some people can earn more than an MP. I doubt they get there paying their staff a full-time wage for part-time work. There is nothing to bar them earning money, just not doing it at the same time. Arguably we would benefit from some becoming MPs after they had earned their money. They would certainly be more vocal and independent.0 -
The wifes father always called it tatties and neepsmalcolmg said:
LOL, tatties and turnipEastwinger said:
With or without Turnips?malcolmg said:
minceMortimer 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...
0 -
you forget the £175K averag eexpenses for your wife and family and paper clips etc. Rifkind charge for paper clips , 5p , 5p and 8p. They are extremely well rewarded and are unlikely to need to touch their salary given the generous unlimited expenses.Richard_Tyndall said:
I agree that £67,000 is a decent wage. I am not so convinced it is the sort of money we should be paying to the people whose job is to govern our country.Jonathan said:
(1) We need better legislationJohnLilburne said:
(1) We need less legislation, not more. Being an MP should be a part time job*. Alternatively, It should be easier for MPs to pass their own legislation without it being Government sponsored.Jonathan said:I strongly object to MPs having second jobs.
(1) Legislation does not get enough scrutiny, it is a full-time, often boring, job.*
(2) It actively encourages conflicts of interests
(3) It enables individuals to stay in Parliament when they are no longer interested in the work of an MP.
* If they have spare time, repeal outdated laws.
(2) Our constitution allows, even demands, MPs to be Government ministers, which is clearly the biggest conflict of interest there is. And many second jobs will not be conflicts of interest.
(3) it allows good people to not have to leave Parliament to make decent money. Thus saving the taxpayer money.
* as is shown by the fact that you can be a Government minister and an MP at the same time.
(2) A combined executive means more work for other MPs and reliance on whips. We need full time MPs to hold the executive to account.
(3) £67,000 is decent money
What I am really not convinced of is that 5 years earnings of £67,000 is sufficient incentive for those following a career path or running their own businesses to give that all up and effectively throw it away (if you are going to ban second jobs) which is what you are asking them to do when they become an MP.0 -
He is correct, I merely used turnip as it was in previous post, I stand very corrected.Eastwinger said:
The wifes father always called it tatties and neepsmalcolmg said:
LOL, tatties and turnipEastwinger said:
With or without Turnips?malcolmg said:
minceMortimer 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...0 -
I know Richard wasnt getting at youRichard_Tyndall said:
To be honest John I have no idea if this is a good idea or not as I have not looked at the details and don't have any experience in healthcare or social service provision. All I was doing was pointing out what had been said on C4.bigjohnowls said:
The provider of part of that care is now the Commissioner of all of it.Richard_Tyndall said:
Watching Channel 4 it appears that it is indeed the whole of the NHS budget for the area and they already have control over the Social Care budget at a local level. So it is far more than the Better Care Fund, it is the NHS budget in total which will then be combined with te eSocial Care budget. Channel 4 are quoting £6 billion of spending moving under local control.MrsB said:ok, here's a thing I do not understand about this Manchester health announcement.
BBC are presenting as if Greater Manchester is getting control of the WHOLE NHS budget. But then they refer to "health and social care". So is this actually about joining up the NHS and council parts of health and social care i.e. the Better Care Fund? If it is, then this is a non-story surely, as some form of joining up health and social care is due in every area of England.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST0 -
Yes: but charging paperclips doesn't pay the gas bill or for your bottle of Chateau Thames Embankment.malcolmg said:you forget the £175K averag eexpenses for your wife and family and paper clips etc. Rifkind charge for paper clips , 5p , 5p and 8p. They are extremely well rewarded and are unlikely to need to touch their salary given the generous unlimited expenses.
Take me or Richard Tyndall or any number of PBers. We have our own small businesses. Would the businesses survive our absence for 5 years?
So, if we were to decide to enter politics, and take a pay cut, we also have to factor in that our businesses probably won't be around on the far side of it. (Especially if 'outside interests' were severely proscribed.0 -
Apparently someone is setting up an owl-themed bar, with real owls. Is this something to do with Ed Miliband?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/foodanddrinknews/11434508/Owl-themed-cocktail-bar-in-London-sparks-concerns-over-birds-welfare-as-thousands-sign-petition.html0
