Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded?" Do you have recent examples that support a sweeping statement? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? Do you have recent examples that support a sweeping statement?" Seriously? dirty Russian money in the Tory party. Johnson & his various financial scandals. Is any of this ringing a bell? It's not just the Tories, either. They're just the most public example in recent years. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? Do you have recent examples that support a sweeping statement? Seriously? dirty Russian money in the Tory party. Johnson & his various financial scandals. Is any of this ringing a bell? It's not just the Tories, either. They're just the most public example in recent years." You seemed to rubbish my idea that Russian influence went further than the internet, iceberg and tip... However, this is money into a party not a MP, what MP's do you know of who are taking money for wrong doings, as you imply? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? Do you have recent examples that support a sweeping statement? Seriously? dirty Russian money in the Tory party. Johnson & his various financial scandals. Is any of this ringing a bell? It's not just the Tories, either. They're just the most public example in recent years. You seemed to rubbish my idea that Russian influence went further than the internet, iceberg and tip... However, this is money into a party not a MP, what MP's do you know of who are taking money for wrong doings, as you imply? " Nope you misread that completely. I simply meant the internet is the biggest & easiest way for mass manipulation/interference by the likes of Russia. As for money taken in return for eg favours, look it up. There have been so many scandals with politicians taking money in dodgy ways. Lobbying scandals too. Take your pick. Johnson alone has a bunch. Cameron's still mired in a lobbying scandal too. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? Do you have recent examples that support a sweeping statement? Seriously? dirty Russian money in the Tory party. Johnson & his various financial scandals. Is any of this ringing a bell? It's not just the Tories, either. They're just the most public example in recent years. You seemed to rubbish my idea that Russian influence went further than the internet, iceberg and tip... However, this is money into a party not a MP, what MP's do you know of who are taking money for wrong doings, as you imply? Nope you misread that completely. I simply meant the internet is the biggest & easiest way for mass manipulation/interference by the likes of Russia. As for money taken in return for eg favours, look it up. There have been so many scandals with politicians taking money in dodgy ways. Lobbying scandals too. Take your pick. Johnson alone has a bunch. Cameron's still mired in a lobbying scandal too." Was Cameron a serving MP when he was lobbying? Tell me more about Johnson taking money for wrong doings? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well there is today's fine example of Labour MP Jared O'Mara stealing taxpayers' money to fund his cocaine habit. Guilty of six counts of fraud. Let's hope he goes away for a very long time. I'm sure we can expect a lot more of this from a Labour government after the next election given the dismal quality of it's MP's." FORMER Labour MP who was suspended for homophones and sexist remarks. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well there is today's fine example of Labour MP Jared O'Mara stealing taxpayers' money to fund his cocaine habit. Guilty of six counts of fraud. Let's hope he goes away for a very long time. I'm sure we can expect a lot more of this from a Labour government after the next election given the dismal quality of it's MP's." To be fair, he was only a Labour MP for just over a year. He was suspended for historical remarks, and eventually left the Labour Party. Nick Clegg must be shaking his head, having lost his seat to a misogynistic, racist crackhead of a thief, who never even asked an oral question as an MP! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? Do you have recent examples that support a sweeping statement?" You do like to play the “nothing really to see here card” quite a lot. Here’s just one example... “Almost half of the money raised by British Prime Minister Liz Truss to fund her Conservative Party leadership campaign came from wealthy donors, according to official donation records published by Parliament on Wednesday. Truss raised nearly £432,549 ($489,472) thanks to donations largely from the business community. More than £230,000 (roughly $290,000) came from owners of hedge funds and bankers -- people who stood to benefit the most from a controversial budget Truss and Finance Minister Kwasi Kwarteng had proposed.” Source is CNN. I could have quoted The Guardian but I would have been accused by some if being a leftie! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded?" Politicians should only be funded by their wages. It should be illegal for them to receive donations and gifts etc. Political parties should be funded by membership fees only. No other donations. And furthermore MPs should not be allowed to be in a situation where a conflict of interest can arise. IE owning a major shareholding in a financial company, as an example. I don't know how to enforce these things. But that wasn't the question. It would be nice to get rid of MPs who serve the interests of those who donate the most, and who serve their own bank accounts. It would be nice to have MPs who are fighting for us instead. Can't see the system changing anytime soon. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded?" I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation." 5. Do away with “2nd home” and ability to “flip”. Their home must be in their constituency. When in Westminster they stay at a Government operated set of serviced apartments. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well there is today's fine example of Labour MP Jared O'Mara stealing taxpayers' money to fund his cocaine habit. Guilty of six counts of fraud. Let's hope he goes away for a very long time. I'm sure we can expect a lot more of this from a Labour government after the next election given the dismal quality of it's MP's." He isn’t a labour MP, but I agree that he should be severely punished  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation. 5. Do away with “2nd home” and ability to “flip”. Their home must be in their constituency. When in Westminster they stay at a Government operated set of serviced apartments." Not much to disagree with there. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well there is today's fine example of Labour MP Jared O'Mara stealing taxpayers' money to fund his cocaine habit. Guilty of six counts of fraud. Let's hope he goes away for a very long time. I'm sure we can expect a lot more of this from a Labour government after the next election given the dismal quality of it's MP's." Oh don’t mention that for goodness sake, these threads are all about slagging off the conservatives on a daily basis. The labour fan boys won’t like it | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Well there is today's fine example of Labour MP Jared O'Mara stealing taxpayers' money to fund his cocaine habit. Guilty of six counts of fraud. Let's hope he goes away for a very long time. I'm sure we can expect a lot more of this from a Labour government after the next election given the dismal quality of it's MP's. Oh don’t mention that for goodness sake, these threads are all about slagging off the conservatives on a daily basis. The labour fan boys won’t like it " Why do you think only labour supporters are unhappy with government corruption and nepotism? Such a weird view point. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation. 5. Do away with “2nd home” and ability to “flip”. Their home must be in their constituency. When in Westminster they stay at a Government operated set of serviced apartments. Not much to disagree with there." Ergo a little thing to disagree on? What would that be? Sure we can all debate the actual salary. My point is they should be paid enough to attract good people. Currently for many the MP salary is pin money compared to their “2nd incomes”. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation. 5. Do away with “2nd home” and ability to “flip”. Their home must be in their constituency. When in Westminster they stay at a Government operated set of serviced apartments. Not much to disagree with there. Ergo a little thing to disagree on? What would that be? Sure we can all debate the actual salary. My point is they should be paid enough to attract good people. Currently for many the MP salary is pin money compared to their “2nd incomes”." I didn't word it very well. I wouldn't disagree with any of it. I'd definitely look at the salary though, possibly with regional differences. Maybe higher than your 120k or maybe lower. I'd like to look at average expenses etc to see what would actually be legitimate first. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Many years ago, MPs were not paid at all. They did it for the honour of serving their country.. How far they've fallen in standard s!!" Not quite. Not being paid at all resulted in: 1. Only wealthy people being MPs 2. Completely serving for their own and their cronies benefit. Pay them more and forbid second jobs, donations etc. Only way to clean up politics. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation. 5. Do away with “2nd home” and ability to “flip”. Their home must be in their constituency. When in Westminster they stay at a Government operated set of serviced apartments. Not much to disagree with there. Ergo a little thing to disagree on? What would that be? Sure we can all debate the actual salary. My point is they should be paid enough to attract good people. Currently for many the MP salary is pin money compared to their “2nd incomes”. I didn't word it very well. I wouldn't disagree with any of it. I'd definitely look at the salary though, possibly with regional differences. Maybe higher than your 120k or maybe lower. I'd like to look at average expenses etc to see what would actually be legitimate first." yes my figures were examples. Main thing is make the salary high enough to attract good intelligent people who see it as a career not a stepping stone into the gravy train. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation." This isn’t about funding but I would prefer MPs to be local or have links to their constituency | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation. This isn’t about funding but I would prefer MPs to be local or have links to their constituency " Take the preference away by making it compulsory. 5 years minimum living in a constituency before you can apply to stand for election | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation. This isn’t about funding but I would prefer MPs to be local or have links to their constituency Take the preference away by making it compulsory. 5 years minimum living in a constituency before you can apply to stand for election " I would be happy with that | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? Do you have recent examples that support a sweeping statement? You do like to play the “nothing really to see here card” quite a lot. Here’s just one example... “Almost half of the money raised by British Prime Minister Liz Truss to fund her Conservative Party leadership campaign came from wealthy donors, according to official donation records published by Parliament on Wednesday. Truss raised nearly £432,549 ($489,472) thanks to donations largely from the business community. More than £230,000 (roughly $290,000) came from owners of hedge funds and bankers -- people who stood to benefit the most from a controversial budget Truss and Finance Minister Kwasi Kwarteng had proposed.” Source is CNN. I could have quoted The Guardian but I would have been accused by some if being a leftie!" Playing the nothing to see here card... I want to understand more than tag lines, simply saying something does not make it true. The Op could provide some sort of meaningful evidence other than the usual vitriol so everyone can get on the same page, it's that simple. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation. 5. Do away with “2nd home” and ability to “flip”. Their home must be in their constituency. When in Westminster they stay at a Government operated set of serviced apartments. Not much to disagree with there. Ergo a little thing to disagree on? What would that be? Sure we can all debate the actual salary. My point is they should be paid enough to attract good people. Currently for many the MP salary is pin money compared to their “2nd incomes”. I didn't word it very well. I wouldn't disagree with any of it. I'd definitely look at the salary though, possibly with regional differences. Maybe higher than your 120k or maybe lower. I'd like to look at average expenses etc to see what would actually be legitimate first." Why regional differences? You either do the job or you don’t. Why should where you live matter? Is one MP’s labour worth less than another's? Where you chose to try and be elected is up to you . No one is forced into parliament. Did I misunderstand your point? I agree with the expenses sentiments regarding a ban on second incomes . I thought MP’s constantly claim they are busy so how can they be efficient with second jobs? Also stop foreign countries/ corporations paying for trips. No wife’s husbands or partners to accompany on any trips. Set up an MPs local office and staff it with civil servants not MPS mates or family then temptation removed and no expenses admin. I agree totally on any MP living outside say M25 can have access to a government apartment to stay overnight. Inside M25 you commute like the rest of the population. No additional £700 increase per extra child on rent allowance . Set the rent on a standard four bed and if you want a bigger you pay out of your salary . We’ve said this before but no standing to be an no if you haven’t lived in the constituency for at least five years prior . Stop parachuting yes men and women . One last thing withdraw all subsidies on food and drinks in parliament and stop selling alcohol. It’s work. Sorry one more, stop ministers using expensive London restaurants for meetings . There are plenty of good chefs and rooms to eat in the Palace of Westminster . Stop closing parliament for holidays. What big industries close so often? It’s known as the best club in the world for a very good reason. I need to stop ! 
A lot of the above was recommended as urgent actions in the 2009 scandal report. That report is gathering dust and has not been implemented. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? Do you have recent examples that support a sweeping statement? You do like to play the “nothing really to see here card” quite a lot. Here’s just one example... “Almost half of the money raised by British Prime Minister Liz Truss to fund her Conservative Party leadership campaign came from wealthy donors, according to official donation records published by Parliament on Wednesday. Truss raised nearly £432,549 ($489,472) thanks to donations largely from the business community. More than £230,000 (roughly $290,000) came from owners of hedge funds and bankers -- people who stood to benefit the most from a controversial budget Truss and Finance Minister Kwasi Kwarteng had proposed.” Source is CNN. I could have quoted The Guardian but I would have been accused by some if being a leftie! Playing the nothing to see here card... I want to understand more than tag lines, simply saying something does not make it true. The Op could provide some sort of meaningful evidence other than the usual vitriol so everyone can get on the same page, it's that simple. " The OP doesn’t need to as I have provided an example. I think that should suffice for this discussion. As you well know, there are many more so feel free to research and post a few  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation. 5. Do away with “2nd home” and ability to “flip”. Their home must be in their constituency. When in Westminster they stay at a Government operated set of serviced apartments. Not much to disagree with there. Ergo a little thing to disagree on? What would that be? Sure we can all debate the actual salary. My point is they should be paid enough to attract good people. Currently for many the MP salary is pin money compared to their “2nd incomes”. I didn't word it very well. I wouldn't disagree with any of it. I'd definitely look at the salary though, possibly with regional differences. Maybe higher than your 120k or maybe lower. I'd like to look at average expenses etc to see what would actually be legitimate first. Why regional differences? You either do the job or you don’t. Why should where you live matter? Is one MP’s labour worth less than another's? Where you chose to try and be elected is up to you . No one is forced into parliament. Did I misunderstand your point? I agree with the expenses sentiments regarding a ban on second incomes . I thought MP’s constantly claim they are busy so how can they be efficient with second jobs? Also stop foreign countries/ corporations paying for trips. No wife’s husbands or partners to accompany on any trips. Set up an MPs local office and staff it with civil servants not MPS mates or family then temptation removed and no expenses admin. I agree totally on any MP living outside say M25 can have access to a government apartment to stay overnight. Inside M25 you commute like the rest of the population. No additional £700 increase per extra child on rent allowance . Set the rent on a standard four bed and if you want a bigger you pay out of your salary . We’ve said this before but no standing to be an no if you haven’t lived in the constituency for at least five years prior . Stop parachuting yes men and women . One last thing withdraw all subsidies on food and drinks in parliament and stop selling alcohol. It’s work. Sorry one more, stop ministers using expensive London restaurants for meetings . There are plenty of good chefs and rooms to eat in the Palace of Westminster . Stop closing parliament for holidays. What big industries close so often? It’s known as the best club in the world for a very good reason. I need to stop !
A lot of the above was recommended as urgent actions in the 2009 scandal report. That report is gathering dust and has not been implemented. "You didn't misunderstand the point I was making. I'd disagree that 'you choose where you tey to be elected'. The whole point in the '5 years residency' is to ensure the local constituents get a local candidate. That would hopefully encourage local people to want to stan, not someone 'who moved to the area' to become a MP. The reason for my regional difference suggestion is purely cost of living. If we're removing all other methods of secondary earning then someone in Essex say, would have quite a considerably higher cost of living than someone in Durham. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation. 5. Do away with “2nd home” and ability to “flip”. Their home must be in their constituency. When in Westminster they stay at a Government operated set of serviced apartments. Not much to disagree with there. Ergo a little thing to disagree on? What would that be? Sure we can all debate the actual salary. My point is they should be paid enough to attract good people. Currently for many the MP salary is pin money compared to their “2nd incomes”. I didn't word it very well. I wouldn't disagree with any of it. I'd definitely look at the salary though, possibly with regional differences. Maybe higher than your 120k or maybe lower. I'd like to look at average expenses etc to see what would actually be legitimate first. Why regional differences? You either do the job or you don’t. Why should where you live matter? Is one MP’s labour worth less than another's? Where you chose to try and be elected is up to you . No one is forced into parliament. Did I misunderstand your point? I agree with the expenses sentiments regarding a ban on second incomes . I thought MP’s constantly claim they are busy so how can they be efficient with second jobs? Also stop foreign countries/ corporations paying for trips. No wife’s husbands or partners to accompany on any trips. Set up an MPs local office and staff it with civil servants not MPS mates or family then temptation removed and no expenses admin. I agree totally on any MP living outside say M25 can have access to a government apartment to stay overnight. Inside M25 you commute like the rest of the population. No additional £700 increase per extra child on rent allowance . Set the rent on a standard four bed and if you want a bigger you pay out of your salary . We’ve said this before but no standing to be an no if you haven’t lived in the constituency for at least five years prior . Stop parachuting yes men and women . One last thing withdraw all subsidies on food and drinks in parliament and stop selling alcohol. It’s work. Sorry one more, stop ministers using expensive London restaurants for meetings . There are plenty of good chefs and rooms to eat in the Palace of Westminster . Stop closing parliament for holidays. What big industries close so often? It’s known as the best club in the world for a very good reason. I need to stop !
A lot of the above was recommended as urgent actions in the 2009 scandal report. That report is gathering dust and has not been implemented.
You didn't misunderstand the point I was making.
I'd disagree that 'you choose where you tey to be elected'. The whole point in the '5 years residency' is to ensure the local constituents get a local candidate. That would hopefully encourage local people to want to stan, not someone 'who moved to the area' to become a MP.
The reason for my regional difference suggestion is purely cost of living. If we're removing all other methods of secondary earning then someone in Essex say, would have quite a considerably higher cost of living than someone in Durham."The residency for five years is something I agree on as I believe totally with your point that it’s true representation. I didn’t explain the you chose bit very well. I meant if someone wants to be an MP where they live ( 5 years ) then the choice is theirs whatever the salary. It’s not compulsory . The salary should be set at a standard rate and all should be paid at that rate . By encouraging regional differences in pay it re-enforces the disfunction in our house prices and regional economics. If people started to say I can’t buy that then maybe MPs being directly affected would make them examine the ridiculous concentration of resources and focus in the south east . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? Do you have recent examples that support a sweeping statement? You do like to play the “nothing really to see here card” quite a lot. Here’s just one example... “Almost half of the money raised by British Prime Minister Liz Truss to fund her Conservative Party leadership campaign came from wealthy donors, according to official donation records published by Parliament on Wednesday. Truss raised nearly £432,549 ($489,472) thanks to donations largely from the business community. More than £230,000 (roughly $290,000) came from owners of hedge funds and bankers -- people who stood to benefit the most from a controversial budget Truss and Finance Minister Kwasi Kwarteng had proposed.” Source is CNN. I could have quoted The Guardian but I would have been accused by some if being a leftie! Playing the nothing to see here card... I want to understand more than tag lines, simply saying something does not make it true. The Op could provide some sort of meaningful evidence other than the usual vitriol so everyone can get on the same page, it's that simple. The OP doesn’t need to as I have provided an example. I think that should suffice for this discussion. As you well know, there are many more so feel free to research and post a few "When did you become the spokesperson for the OP and when were you awarded the position of telling me what I should be happy with when asking a question? Talk about over reaching…… | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation. 5. Do away with “2nd home” and ability to “flip”. Their home must be in their constituency. When in Westminster they stay at a Government operated set of serviced apartments. Not much to disagree with there. Ergo a little thing to disagree on? What would that be? Sure we can all debate the actual salary. My point is they should be paid enough to attract good people. Currently for many the MP salary is pin money compared to their “2nd incomes”. I didn't word it very well. I wouldn't disagree with any of it. I'd definitely look at the salary though, possibly with regional differences. Maybe higher than your 120k or maybe lower. I'd like to look at average expenses etc to see what would actually be legitimate first. Why regional differences? You either do the job or you don’t. Why should where you live matter? Is one MP’s labour worth less than another's? Where you chose to try and be elected is up to you . No one is forced into parliament. Did I misunderstand your point? I agree with the expenses sentiments regarding a ban on second incomes . I thought MP’s constantly claim they are busy so how can they be efficient with second jobs? Also stop foreign countries/ corporations paying for trips. No wife’s husbands or partners to accompany on any trips. Set up an MPs local office and staff it with civil servants not MPS mates or family then temptation removed and no expenses admin. I agree totally on any MP living outside say M25 can have access to a government apartment to stay overnight. Inside M25 you commute like the rest of the population. No additional £700 increase per extra child on rent allowance . Set the rent on a standard four bed and if you want a bigger you pay out of your salary . We’ve said this before but no standing to be an no if you haven’t lived in the constituency for at least five years prior . Stop parachuting yes men and women . One last thing withdraw all subsidies on food and drinks in parliament and stop selling alcohol. It’s work. Sorry one more, stop ministers using expensive London restaurants for meetings . There are plenty of good chefs and rooms to eat in the Palace of Westminster . Stop closing parliament for holidays. What big industries close so often? It’s known as the best club in the world for a very good reason. I need to stop !
A lot of the above was recommended as urgent actions in the 2009 scandal report. That report is gathering dust and has not been implemented.
You didn't misunderstand the point I was making.
I'd disagree that 'you choose where you tey to be elected'. The whole point in the '5 years residency' is to ensure the local constituents get a local candidate. That would hopefully encourage local people to want to stan, not someone 'who moved to the area' to become a MP.
The reason for my regional difference suggestion is purely cost of living. If we're removing all other methods of secondary earning then someone in Essex say, would have quite a considerably higher cost of living than someone in Durham.
The residency for five years is something I agree on as I believe totally with your point that it’s true representation.
I didn’t explain the you chose bit very well.
I meant if someone wants to be an MP where they live ( 5 years ) then the choice is theirs whatever the salary. It’s not compulsory .
The salary should be set at a standard rate and all should be paid at that rate . By encouraging regional differences in pay it re-enforces the disfunction in our house prices and regional economics. If people started to say I can’t buy that then maybe MPs being directly affected would make them examine the ridiculous concentration of resources and focus in the south east .
"I don't disagree that it could re-inforce the disfunction in regional differences. I just don't know how you set a of them at a 'standard' rate if you can't do it with all other industries. I live in one of the most expensive parts of the uk yet wages here for our biggest employment sectors are truly fucking dreadful. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation. 5. Do away with “2nd home” and ability to “flip”. Their home must be in their constituency. When in Westminster they stay at a Government operated set of serviced apartments. Not much to disagree with there. Ergo a little thing to disagree on? What would that be? Sure we can all debate the actual salary. My point is they should be paid enough to attract good people. Currently for many the MP salary is pin money compared to their “2nd incomes”. I didn't word it very well. I wouldn't disagree with any of it. I'd definitely look at the salary though, possibly with regional differences. Maybe higher than your 120k or maybe lower. I'd like to look at average expenses etc to see what would actually be legitimate first. Why regional differences? You either do the job or you don’t. Why should where you live matter? Is one MP’s labour worth less than another's? Where you chose to try and be elected is up to you . No one is forced into parliament. Did I misunderstand your point? I agree with the expenses sentiments regarding a ban on second incomes . I thought MP’s constantly claim they are busy so how can they be efficient with second jobs? Also stop foreign countries/ corporations paying for trips. No wife’s husbands or partners to accompany on any trips. Set up an MPs local office and staff it with civil servants not MPS mates or family then temptation removed and no expenses admin. I agree totally on any MP living outside say M25 can have access to a government apartment to stay overnight. Inside M25 you commute like the rest of the population. No additional £700 increase per extra child on rent allowance . Set the rent on a standard four bed and if you want a bigger you pay out of your salary . We’ve said this before but no standing to be an no if you haven’t lived in the constituency for at least five years prior . Stop parachuting yes men and women . One last thing withdraw all subsidies on food and drinks in parliament and stop selling alcohol. It’s work. Sorry one more, stop ministers using expensive London restaurants for meetings . There are plenty of good chefs and rooms to eat in the Palace of Westminster . Stop closing parliament for holidays. What big industries close so often? It’s known as the best club in the world for a very good reason. I need to stop !
A lot of the above was recommended as urgent actions in the 2009 scandal report. That report is gathering dust and has not been implemented.
You didn't misunderstand the point I was making.
I'd disagree that 'you choose where you tey to be elected'. The whole point in the '5 years residency' is to ensure the local constituents get a local candidate. That would hopefully encourage local people to want to stan, not someone 'who moved to the area' to become a MP.
The reason for my regional difference suggestion is purely cost of living. If we're removing all other methods of secondary earning then someone in Essex say, would have quite a considerably higher cost of living than someone in Durham.
The residency for five years is something I agree on as I believe totally with your point that it’s true representation.
I didn’t explain the you chose bit very well.
I meant if someone wants to be an MP where they live ( 5 years ) then the choice is theirs whatever the salary. It’s not compulsory .
The salary should be set at a standard rate and all should be paid at that rate . By encouraging regional differences in pay it re-enforces the disfunction in our house prices and regional economics. If people started to say I can’t buy that then maybe MPs being directly affected would make them examine the ridiculous concentration of resources and focus in the south east .
I don't disagree that it could re-inforce the disfunction in regional differences. I just don't know how you set a of them at a 'standard' rate if you can't do it with all other industries.
I live in one of the most expensive parts of the uk yet wages here for our biggest employment sectors are truly fucking dreadful."You’re giving a prime example of why it needs addressing and how the government fail to push property developers to use their land banks. . The land is more expensive if it’s in short supply. . Who funds 25% of the Conservative Party ? Yep property developers . Cause and effect . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation. 5. Do away with “2nd home” and ability to “flip”. Their home must be in their constituency. When in Westminster they stay at a Government operated set of serviced apartments. Not much to disagree with there. Ergo a little thing to disagree on? What would that be? Sure we can all debate the actual salary. My point is they should be paid enough to attract good people. Currently for many the MP salary is pin money compared to their “2nd incomes”. I didn't word it very well. I wouldn't disagree with any of it. I'd definitely look at the salary though, possibly with regional differences. Maybe higher than your 120k or maybe lower. I'd like to look at average expenses etc to see what would actually be legitimate first. Why regional differences? You either do the job or you don’t. Why should where you live matter? Is one MP’s labour worth less than another's? Where you chose to try and be elected is up to you . No one is forced into parliament. Did I misunderstand your point? I agree with the expenses sentiments regarding a ban on second incomes . I thought MP’s constantly claim they are busy so how can they be efficient with second jobs? Also stop foreign countries/ corporations paying for trips. No wife’s husbands or partners to accompany on any trips. Set up an MPs local office and staff it with civil servants not MPS mates or family then temptation removed and no expenses admin. I agree totally on any MP living outside say M25 can have access to a government apartment to stay overnight. Inside M25 you commute like the rest of the population. No additional £700 increase per extra child on rent allowance . Set the rent on a standard four bed and if you want a bigger you pay out of your salary . We’ve said this before but no standing to be an no if you haven’t lived in the constituency for at least five years prior . Stop parachuting yes men and women . One last thing withdraw all subsidies on food and drinks in parliament and stop selling alcohol. It’s work. Sorry one more, stop ministers using expensive London restaurants for meetings . There are plenty of good chefs and rooms to eat in the Palace of Westminster . Stop closing parliament for holidays. What big industries close so often? It’s known as the best club in the world for a very good reason. I need to stop !
A lot of the above was recommended as urgent actions in the 2009 scandal report. That report is gathering dust and has not been implemented.
You didn't misunderstand the point I was making.
I'd disagree that 'you choose where you tey to be elected'. The whole point in the '5 years residency' is to ensure the local constituents get a local candidate. That would hopefully encourage local people to want to stan, not someone 'who moved to the area' to become a MP.
The reason for my regional difference suggestion is purely cost of living. If we're removing all other methods of secondary earning then someone in Essex say, would have quite a considerably higher cost of living than someone in Durham.
The residency for five years is something I agree on as I believe totally with your point that it’s true representation.
I didn’t explain the you chose bit very well.
I meant if someone wants to be an MP where they live ( 5 years ) then the choice is theirs whatever the salary. It’s not compulsory .
The salary should be set at a standard rate and all should be paid at that rate . By encouraging regional differences in pay it re-enforces the disfunction in our house prices and regional economics. If people started to say I can’t buy that then maybe MPs being directly affected would make them examine the ridiculous concentration of resources and focus in the south east .
I don't disagree that it could re-inforce the disfunction in regional differences. I just don't know how you set a of them at a 'standard' rate if you can't do it with all other industries.
I live in one of the most expensive parts of the uk yet wages here for our biggest employment sectors are truly fucking dreadful.
You’re giving a prime example of why it needs addressing and how the government fail to push property developers to use their land banks. .
The land is more expensive if it’s in short supply. . Who funds 25% of the Conservative Party ? Yep property developers .
Cause and effect . "Oh I'm well aware it needs addressing. The issue here hasn't only been lack of development. HMO licences have played a massive part in why its so expensive to live here. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? Do you have recent examples that support a sweeping statement? You do like to play the “nothing really to see here card” quite a lot. Here’s just one example... “Almost half of the money raised by British Prime Minister Liz Truss to fund her Conservative Party leadership campaign came from wealthy donors, according to official donation records published by Parliament on Wednesday. Truss raised nearly £432,549 ($489,472) thanks to donations largely from the business community. More than £230,000 (roughly $290,000) came from owners of hedge funds and bankers -- people who stood to benefit the most from a controversial budget Truss and Finance Minister Kwasi Kwarteng had proposed.” Source is CNN. I could have quoted The Guardian but I would have been accused by some if being a leftie! Playing the nothing to see here card... I want to understand more than tag lines, simply saying something does not make it true. The Op could provide some sort of meaningful evidence other than the usual vitriol so everyone can get on the same page, it's that simple. The OP doesn’t need to as I have provided an example. I think that should suffice for this discussion. As you well know, there are many more so feel free to research and post a few
When did you become the spokesperson for the OP and when were you awarded the position of telling me what I should be happy with when asking a question?
Talk about over reaching……
"Not posting for the OP, just wonder why the example I provided wasn’t sufficient evidence for your question? As for your other points...really! Calm down dear | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? Do you have recent examples that support a sweeping statement? You do like to play the “nothing really to see here card” quite a lot. Here’s just one example... “Almost half of the money raised by British Prime Minister Liz Truss to fund her Conservative Party leadership campaign came from wealthy donors, according to official donation records published by Parliament on Wednesday. Truss raised nearly £432,549 ($489,472) thanks to donations largely from the business community. More than £230,000 (roughly $290,000) came from owners of hedge funds and bankers -- people who stood to benefit the most from a controversial budget Truss and Finance Minister Kwasi Kwarteng had proposed.” Source is CNN. I could have quoted The Guardian but I would have been accused by some if being a leftie! Playing the nothing to see here card... I want to understand more than tag lines, simply saying something does not make it true. The Op could provide some sort of meaningful evidence other than the usual vitriol so everyone can get on the same page, it's that simple. The OP doesn’t need to as I have provided an example. I think that should suffice for this discussion. As you well know, there are many more so feel free to research and post a few
When did you become the spokesperson for the OP and when were you awarded the position of telling me what I should be happy with when asking a question?
Talk about over reaching……
Not posting for the OP, just wonder why the example I provided wasn’t sufficient evidence for your question?
As for your other points...really! Calm down dear "I’m not sure how I could hear your voice in that reply, but I did  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? Do you have recent examples that support a sweeping statement? You do like to play the “nothing really to see here card” quite a lot. Here’s just one example... “Almost half of the money raised by British Prime Minister Liz Truss to fund her Conservative Party leadership campaign came from wealthy donors, according to official donation records published by Parliament on Wednesday. Truss raised nearly £432,549 ($489,472) thanks to donations largely from the business community. More than £230,000 (roughly $290,000) came from owners of hedge funds and bankers -- people who stood to benefit the most from a controversial budget Truss and Finance Minister Kwasi Kwarteng had proposed.” Source is CNN. I could have quoted The Guardian but I would have been accused by some if being a leftie! Playing the nothing to see here card... I want to understand more than tag lines, simply saying something does not make it true. The Op could provide some sort of meaningful evidence other than the usual vitriol so everyone can get on the same page, it's that simple. The OP doesn’t need to as I have provided an example. I think that should suffice for this discussion. As you well know, there are many more so feel free to research and post a few
When did you become the spokesperson for the OP and when were you awarded the position of telling me what I should be happy with when asking a question?
Talk about over reaching……
Not posting for the OP, just wonder why the example I provided wasn’t sufficient evidence for your question?
As for your other points...really! Calm down dear
I’m not sure how I could hear your voice in that reply, but I did "Sounds a bit pervy that  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? I would do the following: 1. Give all MPs a big payrise, maybe up from £84k (think they get that ish) to £120k. 2. All MPs get a set budget allocated to them from central Govt funds to pay for their office and staff. 3. Very tightly control any other expenses in line with Civil Service process. 4. Forbid second jobs/consultancies or acceptance of any gift or donation." In addition, house all MP in a central London office block converted in to flats with dedicated office space. That way costs can be controlled regarding 2nd homes with economies of scale. Treat being an MP as job…. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? Do you have recent examples that support a sweeping statement? You do like to play the “nothing really to see here card” quite a lot. Here’s just one example... “Almost half of the money raised by British Prime Minister Liz Truss to fund her Conservative Party leadership campaign came from wealthy donors, according to official donation records published by Parliament on Wednesday. Truss raised nearly £432,549 ($489,472) thanks to donations largely from the business community. More than £230,000 (roughly $290,000) came from owners of hedge funds and bankers -- people who stood to benefit the most from a controversial budget Truss and Finance Minister Kwasi Kwarteng had proposed.” Source is CNN. I could have quoted The Guardian but I would have been accused by some if being a leftie! Playing the nothing to see here card... I want to understand more than tag lines, simply saying something does not make it true. The Op could provide some sort of meaningful evidence other than the usual vitriol so everyone can get on the same page, it's that simple. The OP doesn’t need to as I have provided an example. I think that should suffice for this discussion. As you well know, there are many more so feel free to research and post a few
When did you become the spokesperson for the OP and when were you awarded the position of telling me what I should be happy with when asking a question?
Talk about over reaching……
"There are a few who feel they control the forums | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? Do you have recent examples that support a sweeping statement? You do like to play the “nothing really to see here card” quite a lot. Here’s just one example... “Almost half of the money raised by British Prime Minister Liz Truss to fund her Conservative Party leadership campaign came from wealthy donors, according to official donation records published by Parliament on Wednesday. Truss raised nearly £432,549 ($489,472) thanks to donations largely from the business community. More than £230,000 (roughly $290,000) came from owners of hedge funds and bankers -- people who stood to benefit the most from a controversial budget Truss and Finance Minister Kwasi Kwarteng had proposed.” Source is CNN. I could have quoted The Guardian but I would have been accused by some if being a leftie! Playing the nothing to see here card... I want to understand more than tag lines, simply saying something does not make it true. The Op could provide some sort of meaningful evidence other than the usual vitriol so everyone can get on the same page, it's that simple. The OP doesn’t need to as I have provided an example. I think that should suffice for this discussion. As you well know, there are many more so feel free to research and post a few
When did you become the spokesperson for the OP and when were you awarded the position of telling me what I should be happy with when asking a question?
Talk about over reaching……
There are a few who feel they control the forums"Mods? Since you're here, do you have any thoughts on the actual thread topic? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why do some people seem happy to be ripped off while being willfully blind? Since I was asked for examples, here are a few: Wallpapergate. Johnson tried to get Tory donors to pay for his flat refurb, until he was found out. While he was PM. JCB. Johnson again. From the BBC: Former PM Boris Johnson received a donation worth £23,853 from JCB boss Anthony Bamford and his wife Carole to pay for wedding celebration costs. The appointment of Richard Sharp as BBC chair. This happened after Sharp was involved in helping to sort out a guarantee on a loan worth up to £800,000 for Johnson in late 2020. Bamford & Johnson (again). It was revealed Johnson started residing in a £20 million London property owned by the wife of Tory donor Lord Bamford. To date we have no idea how much rent he's paying, but I'll eat my hat if it's anything like the market rate. Owen Paterson. This guy breached lobbying rules by advocating for two companies he was being paid by. While he was an MP. It goes on & on like this. Johnson is just the most glaring example in recent years. I doubt this sort of thing will ever end unless strict rules are put in place about funding/gifts for politicians + meaningful punishments for wrongdoers. " I understand where you are coming from now
Do you think how politicians are paid is the driving force behind the behaviours you mention above?
I would suggest it’s the politicians in question rather than the way they’re paid. I would expect Johnson to seek funding and donations no matter the amount of money he is paid. I mentioned this on another thread, our politicians are very much a reflection of our society today, they always will be or they won’t resonate with the public. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why do some people seem happy to be ripped off while being willfully blind? Since I was asked for examples, here are a few: Wallpapergate. Johnson tried to get Tory donors to pay for his flat refurb, until he was found out. While he was PM. JCB. Johnson again. From the BBC: Former PM Boris Johnson received a donation worth £23,853 from JCB boss Anthony Bamford and his wife Carole to pay for wedding celebration costs. The appointment of Richard Sharp as BBC chair. This happened after Sharp was involved in helping to sort out a guarantee on a loan worth up to £800,000 for Johnson in late 2020. Bamford & Johnson (again). It was revealed Johnson started residing in a £20 million London property owned by the wife of Tory donor Lord Bamford. To date we have no idea how much rent he's paying, but I'll eat my hat if it's anything like the market rate. Owen Paterson. This guy breached lobbying rules by advocating for two companies he was being paid by. While he was an MP. It goes on & on like this. Johnson is just the most glaring example in recent years. I doubt this sort of thing will ever end unless strict rules are put in place about funding/gifts for politicians + meaningful punishments for wrongdoers. I understand where you are coming from now
Do you think how politicians are paid is the driving force behind the behaviours you mention above?
I would suggest it’s the politicians in question rather than the way they’re paid. I would expect Johnson to seek funding and donations no matter the amount of money he is paid. I mentioned this on another thread, our politicians are very much a reflection of our society today, they always will be or they won’t resonate with the public."I don't think it's about resonating with the public. I think it's about doing whatever the current rules/system lets them get away with to maximise the amount they can take for themselves. But I think the driving factor is actually... unclear in a way. It's a mix of greed & necessity. With greed, it's obvious. Certain politicians - the Johnsons of this world - just want as much stuff as possible for themselves. They'll get it any way they can. This stuff could be clamped down on by stricter rules for what can be accepted + everything having to be declared + strict punishments for breaking those rules at all. But when it comes to getting re-elected, politicians need certain funds & contacts on side to get re-elected. That's a bigger problem in a way. It results in politicians getting into bed with big business & shady people. Worst case scenario, it results in politicians acting against the interests of this country. Maybe the solution there is purely open & public funding at every stage. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded?" By the people who choose to vote for politicians, if you do not vote you are taxed less, parliamentary democracy is a choice. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? By the people who choose to vote for politicians, if you do not vote you are taxed less, parliamentary democracy is a choice." Sounds like that might lead to: people who can't afford to pay don't get a vote. Might not be a good situation. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? By the people who choose to vote for politicians, if you do not vote you are taxed less, parliamentary democracy is a choice. Sounds like that might lead to: people who can't afford to pay don't get a vote. Might not be a good situation." I said taxed less,, nothing to pay, a reduction in your tax burden. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? By the people who choose to vote for politicians, if you do not vote you are taxed less, parliamentary democracy is a choice. Sounds like that might lead to: people who can't afford to pay don't get a vote. Might not be a good situation. I said taxed less,, nothing to pay, a reduction in your tax burden." I read your post. Being taxed less if you don't vote still feels like a route to people who don't have enough money being incentivised to not vote. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It ought to be quite simple. A complete ban with no grey areas on any form of funding, loan or gift. Remove any opportunity to play the system so that the system cannot be played. Removes the temptation to be corrupt or able to be corrupted." Sounds nice, so I doubt it'll ever happen. Alas. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It ought to be quite simple. A complete ban with no grey areas on any form of funding, loan or gift. Remove any opportunity to play the system so that the system cannot be played. Removes the temptation to be corrupt or able to be corrupted. Sounds nice, so I doubt it'll ever happen. Alas." Indeed! Ironically I doubt MPs would vote for it! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You'll never "clean up" politics - impossible. Even at a local level. Ever wondered why so many local councillors clamour to get on the planning committee? Back-handers galore and free holidays providing the councillor votes the "right way" for a certain planning application in a certain place. Been going on for a very long time but everyone pretends it doesn't lol!" The difference is a local councillor is likely to be prosecuted if caught whereas an MP is just fine as long as he declares his gifts! It’s actually nuts that we allow it at all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You'll never "clean up" politics - impossible. Even at a local level. Ever wondered why so many local councillors clamour to get on the planning committee? Back-handers galore and free holidays providing the councillor votes the "right way" for a certain planning application in a certain place. Been going on for a very long time but everyone pretends it doesn't lol! The difference is a local councillor is likely to be prosecuted if caught whereas an MP is just fine as long as he declares his gifts! It’s actually nuts that we allow it at all." The electorate are ignorant and thick. And they know it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded?" They should be sponsored. And do product placement in all their public speaking. Like imagine Sunak being sponsored by DFS. Does PMQs sat on a different sofa each week Or head and shoulders shampoo | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It seems like many of the problems we suffer with politics/politicians stems from the way they take money from certain people/companies. Inevitably, there's an implicit deal there. I take your money. In return I give you... So how should politicians be funded? They should be sponsored. And do product placement in all their public speaking. Like imagine Sunak being sponsored by DFS. Does PMQs sat on a different sofa each week Or head and shoulders shampoo " Imagine... Mr sunak is a goldmen sachs boy replace sofa with comfy hedge fund. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Any gifts, funds, or other way of being financed should be made crystal clear. Ian Hislop tore a select commitee apart over just this, saying that there was too much smoke and mirrors." Hislop tends to be v good at that sort of thing | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It ought to be quite simple. A complete ban with no grey areas on any form of funding, loan or gift. Remove any opportunity to play the system so that the system cannot be played. Removes the temptation to be corrupt or able to be corrupted." Gets my vote. And the "culture" of gifting needs eliminating right across the board from all walks of business life. Even the "We'd like take you, the Client, out for lunch somewhere" or "We're treating you to a day in our Director's Box at Man U" (poor sods). That still creates an environment of expectation and reciprocity. Ban it. Ban it all. It's all corrupt as hell. There is no innocence in giving a business gift. None whatsoever. Nada. Zilch. Zero. Burn it all down now. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Many years ago, MPs were not paid at all. They did it for the honour of serving their country.. How far they've fallen in standard s!!" Yes, in those days only the aristocracy and landed gentry could afford to waste their time on politics and so spent that time passing laws that protected their wealth and privilege. Thankfully, things have changed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is any1 actually happy with the way politicians are funded?" Nope. Someone should do a You Gov petition to propose a change of the law in how politicians get paid and how much. Flat salary structure. 30K year. Boom. It would be amusing to see it rapidly rise to Number 1 on the YG site, and MP's then have to debate it (no doubt through gritted teeth). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is any1 actually happy with the way politicians are funded? Nope. Someone should do a You Gov petition to propose a change of the law in how politicians get paid and how much. Flat salary structure. 30K year. Boom. It would be amusing to see it rapidly rise to Number 1 on the YG site, and MP's then have to debate it (no doubt through gritted teeth)." Only if it reaches 100,000 and even then it’s not compulsory, This from the .GOV website (You Gov is a private polling company). Debates Petitions which reach 100,000 signatures are ALMOST always debated. But we may decide NOT to put a petition forward for debate if the issue has already been debated recently or there’s a debate scheduled for the near future. If that’s the case, we’ll tell you how you can find out more about parliamentary debates on the issue raised by your petition. In addition it must be something the Government is responsible for Standards for petitions Petitions must call for a specific action from the UK Government or the House of Commons. Petitions must be about something that the Government or the House of Commons is directly responsible for. The government is no longer responsible for MP’s pay. MPs’ pay is set independently of both the government and parliament, and is instead set by Ipsa, which was set up in the wake of the 2009 expenses scandal. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Many years ago, MPs were not paid at all. They did it for the honour of serving their country.. How far they've fallen in standard s!!" …or serving their own interests ..not all, but some. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Is any1 actually happy with the way politicians are funded? Nope. Someone should do a You Gov petition to propose a change of the law in how politicians get paid and how much. Flat salary structure. 30K year. Boom. It would be amusing to see it rapidly rise to Number 1 on the YG site, and MP's then have to debate it (no doubt through gritted teeth)." Most of the ?? end Mp’s are not worth anything like £30k | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Many years ago, MPs were not paid at all. They did it for the honour of serving their country.. How far they've fallen in standard s!!" …or serving their own interests ..not all, but some. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So how on this forum would want the PM job. " Feels like a topic for another thread. You could start it. I wonder what the answers might be. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So how on this forum would want the PM job. " Not in a million years. For a start you fuckers would let the media know about my/our dark swinger past and Fab! Scandal city here! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So how on this forum would want the PM job. Not in a million years. For a start you fuckers would let the media know about my/our dark swinger past and Fab! Scandal city here!" Absolutely we would | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So how on this forum would want the PM job. " I like this idea, we could give out ministerial roles to the forum users who need to slot in and answer questions as the minister…. We will obviously need runners up in the shadows. I can’t see this going south for one moment | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It ought to be quite simple. A complete ban with no grey areas on any form of funding, loan or gift. Remove any opportunity to play the system so that the system cannot be played. Removes the temptation to be corrupt or able to be corrupted. Gets my vote. And the "culture" of gifting needs eliminating right across the board from all walks of business life. Even the "We'd like take you, the Client, out for lunch somewhere" or "We're treating you to a day in our Director's Box at Man U" (poor sods). That still creates an environment of expectation and reciprocity. Ban it. Ban it all. It's all corrupt as hell. There is no innocence in giving a business gift. None whatsoever. Nada. Zilch. Zero. Burn it all down now." The gifting thing, should go to someone in the community who deserves it. Like a nurse, a carer, someone who went above and beyond at some point. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Why do some people seem happy to be ripped off while being willfully blind? Since I was asked for examples, here are a few: Wallpapergate. Johnson tried to get Tory donors to pay for his flat refurb, until he was found out. While he was PM. JCB. Johnson again. From the BBC: Former PM Boris Johnson received a donation worth £23,853 from JCB boss Anthony Bamford and his wife Carole to pay for wedding celebration costs. The appointment of Richard Sharp as BBC chair. This happened after Sharp was involved in helping to sort out a guarantee on a loan worth up to £800,000 for Johnson in late 2020. Bamford & Johnson (again). It was revealed Johnson started residing in a £20 million London property owned by the wife of Tory donor Lord Bamford. To date we have no idea how much rent he's paying, but I'll eat my hat if it's anything like the market rate. Owen Paterson. This guy breached lobbying rules by advocating for two companies he was being paid by. While he was an MP. It goes on & on like this. Johnson is just the most glaring example in recent years. I doubt this sort of thing will ever end unless strict rules are put in place about funding/gifts for politicians + meaningful punishments for wrongdoers. " Defo! Corruption will always be part of politics, it's more about how it can be limited /controlled/investigated/punished. The only difference, I think, is that Boris and his clique have no shame about it, even when exposed. I'm sure there are corrupt Labour/Libdems as well, but they're currently in the shadows as spotlight is always on ruling party. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We would say in bullets but that is just us being mean." The really corrupt ones, will already have a buyer lined up for the unfired ones lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
