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 |
| |||
| 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’s the fun part of being an mp… you have to declare all your earnings in the parliament “book of interests” So we found out a couple of things yesterday….. The MP for clacton is now the highest earning MP in the entire parliament….. So on top of the 91k per year he is earning as an MP, he is also earning 97k per month from presenting his programme on GB News.. plus other little bits and bobs ( appearance fees and newspaper articles ect) The MP for clacton is currently earning almost £1.3 million pounds per year… So… question…. Should MP’s from doing 2nd jobs? " I would much prefer that MP's did not do second jobs but until that rule changes we are stuck with it. Personally, as long as he is sticking to the rules on outside earnings then I don't see a problem. | |||
| 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 |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What happened to the notion that the media was supposed to hold MPs and public figures to account? The press and news outlets are supposed to ask these people the difficult questions and hold their feet to the flames for proper answers. Journalism is dead and has been replaced by commentators and echo chamber talking heads. If it's farage on gb news or lammy on lbc....no MP should be holding slots on the media. The media should be hammering them on policy not amplifying their message." You forgot Yvette Cooper being interviewed by her husband on TV. It seems everything mentioned is within the rules so it is the rules that are at fault, not individuals for following them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s the fun part of being an mp… you have to declare all your earnings in the parliament “book of interests” So we found out a couple of things yesterday….. The MP for clacton is now the highest earning MP in the entire parliament….. So on top of the 91k per year he is earning as an MP, he is also earning 97k per month from presenting his programme on GB News.. plus other little bits and bobs ( appearance fees and newspaper articles ect) The MP for clacton is currently earning almost £1.3 million pounds per year… So… question…. Should MP’s from doing 2nd jobs? " If a consultant is employed by the nhs, they can only work a maximum extra number of hours privately. The same should be for an MP. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s the fun part of being an mp… you have to declare all your earnings in the parliament “book of interests” So we found out a couple of things yesterday….. The MP for clacton is now the highest earning MP in the entire parliament….. So on top of the 91k per year he is earning as an MP, he is also earning 97k per month from presenting his programme on GB News.. plus other little bits and bobs ( appearance fees and newspaper articles ect) The MP for clacton is currently earning almost £1.3 million pounds per year… So… question…. Should MP’s from doing 2nd jobs? If a consultant is employed by the nhs, they can only work a maximum extra number of hours privately. The same should be for an MP." Oh and an MP should HAVE to work a minimum number of hours a month. Otherwise wtf is their hourly rate? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Jealous??"  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I suppose it shows, if nothing else, that GB News is just a rich man’s propaganda tool rather than a business." Explain please. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Who really cares if a private company is paying him that much,on the other hand if it was the beeb paying him I could understand the outrage seems as there funded by the public" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Actually the biggest issue I have is this… In the register of interest he states that his outside mp’s job “employment” accounts for 72 hours per month of his time…. That equates to 9 full days per month….. I love to think I am good at time management, but that’s time he is not spending for example on constituency business, examining legislation ect…. For example… he has yet to hold a constituency surgery yet… " I would guess he hasn’t held a surgery yet due to safety reasons To many leftie nutters about | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It wasn’t so long ago folk on here were laughing at him because they insisted Coutts closed his account because he was skint. Now they get all riled up because his company is earning a decent wedge. Politics forum - everyone should be paid more…except people we don’t like. Personally I’d rather we had about a third of the MP’s we currently have and they got paid 3 times as much, with minimal expenses and be barred from additional employment / media work / book deals etc. What’s that saying about hating the game not the player? " "Everyone should be paid more…except people we don’t like" There's truth in this. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Who really cares if a private company is paying him that much,on the other hand if it was the beeb paying him I could understand the outrage seems as there funded by the public" It may interfere with his mp work. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I suppose it shows, if nothing else, that GB News is just a rich man’s propaganda tool rather than a business. Explain please." GB News has lost £76 million since it was launched, its biggest loss came in the 2023 financial year, £42.4 million. That’s not a sustainable business without it being propped up by someone, that someone happens to be Sir Paul Roderick Clucas Marshall. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Elected to parliament for the first time, great highly paying second job. Leftists have been branding him a failure for so long, I can understand why they have arse ache now they know he isn’t, never has been. Farage fir PM 2029!" This lefty wants ALL MPs to earn their pay... you know, that which comes from the tax payer. The rest of us public sector workers are always getting in the neck about pay. Yet many of us do many hours more than we get paid for. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It’s the fun part of being an mp… you have to declare all your earnings in the parliament “book of interests” So we found out a couple of things yesterday….. The MP for clacton is now the highest earning MP in the entire parliament….. So on top of the 91k per year he is earning as an MP, he is also earning 97k per month from presenting his programme on GB News.. plus other little bits and bobs ( appearance fees and newspaper articles ect) The MP for clacton is currently earning almost £1.3 million pounds per year… So… question…. Should MP’s from doing 2nd jobs? " there job is supposedly hard enough so a 2nd job should be impossible | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What happened to the notion that the media was supposed to hold MPs and public figures to account? The press and news outlets are supposed to ask these people the difficult questions and hold their feet to the flames for proper answers. Journalism is dead and has been replaced by commentators and echo chamber talking heads. If it's farage on gb news or lammy on lbc....no MP should be holding slots on the media. The media should be hammering them on policy not amplifying their message." 100% | |||
| 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 |
"Small beer Boris Johnson has now received earnings, hospitality and donations worth more than £5m since leaving Downing Street" Small beer compared to Blair, kinnock didn't do to bad either, never even made the top spot | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So what? Wgaf? It's a private company. They can pay what they want." I do actually agree. I don't care how much that joke of a TV channel pays this clown. But the issue, as mentioned above, is that the media is supposed to be holding to account out politicians. Can't really be trusted to grill anyone from Reform. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So what? Wgaf? It's a private company. They can pay what they want. I do actually agree. I don't care how much that joke of a TV channel pays this clown. But the issue, as mentioned above, is that the media is supposed to be holding to account out politicians. Can't really be trusted to grill anyone from Reform. " So what? Plenty of other channels and people are willing to. Even if GB news is partisan in favour of Farage so what? Most other channels don't hide their lefty credentials. BBC, ITV,channel4... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So what? Wgaf? It's a private company. They can pay what they want. I do actually agree. I don't care how much that joke of a TV channel pays this clown. " ************************************* Why is GB news a 'joke'.....? Why label Nigel Farage a 'clown'.....?? I see nothing even remotely amusing regarding GB news when I have time to view. I've also not noticed Mr. Farage dressed up to resemble a 'clown' either. On the other hand, every time I look in this joke-bound so-called 'political' section there's more than enough clowns spewing peurile rubbish that even a ten year old couldn't mimic. The silly statements and occasional ridiculous sniping really deserves a place in some publication such as a latter day 'Comic Cuts'...! I've actually been compiling certain brainless outbursts from the usual handful of fantasists, who vent themselves at random here, I think they're terrific in their own way, after all, who actually thinks their crakkpottiness (!) is serious on a platform such as this....??! The good and sensible contributors ( they ALL know who they are and I respect them for what they post and the adult language used in such) BUT..... don't mind me, carry on carping...!! Bye...!! XXX  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So what? Wgaf? It's a private company. They can pay what they want. I do actually agree. I don't care how much that joke of a TV channel pays this clown. But the issue, as mentioned above, is that the media is supposed to be holding to account out politicians. Can't really be trusted to grill anyone from Reform. So what? Plenty of other channels and people are willing to. Even if GB news is partisan in favour of Farage so what? Most other channels don't hide their lefty credentials. BBC, ITV,channel4..." No MPs should be working in the media, in my opinion. You mentioned before that you view any channels that use information to be "lefty" but that doesn't make it so. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So what? Wgaf? It's a private company. They can pay what they want. I do actually agree. I don't care how much that joke of a TV channel pays this clown. But the issue, as mentioned above, is that the media is supposed to be holding to account out politicians. Can't really be trusted to grill anyone from Reform. So what? Plenty of other channels and people are willing to. Even if GB news is partisan in favour of Farage so what? Most other channels don't hide their lefty credentials. BBC, ITV,channel4... No MPs should be working in the media, in my opinion. You mentioned before that you view any channels that use information to be "lefty" but that doesn't make it so."
It's irrelevant if the news/media outlets are lefty or righty. The media is (should be) there to act as the bridge between the establishment and the tax paying public. All credibility is lost when arse holes like farage, mogg, lammy, balls....(choose your favourite arse hole) get to present their own shows.
They're hardly likely to ask themselves searching questions that could bring to light their own agenda. Instead you only get bullshit and rhetoric that further amplifies their own ideas.
Get wise to it! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"So what? Wgaf? It's a private company. They can pay what they want. I do actually agree. I don't care how much that joke of a TV channel pays this clown. But the issue, as mentioned above, is that the media is supposed to be holding to account out politicians. Can't really be trusted to grill anyone from Reform. So what? Plenty of other channels and people are willing to. Even if GB news is partisan in favour of Farage so what? Most other channels don't hide their lefty credentials. BBC, ITV,channel4... No MPs should be working in the media, in my opinion. You mentioned before that you view any channels that use information to be "lefty" but that doesn't make it so.
It's irrelevant if the news/media outlets are lefty or righty. The media is (should be) there to act as the bridge between the establishment and the tax paying public. All credibility is lost when arse holes like farage, mogg, lammy, balls....(choose your favourite arse hole) get to present their own shows.
They're hardly likely to ask themselves searching questions that could bring to light their own agenda. Instead you only get bullshit and rhetoric that further amplifies their own ideas.
Get wise to it!"To be fair to Ed Balls, he’s not been an MP for a few years now. Still ridiculous that he was allowed to interview his wife though. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Elected to parliament for the first time, great highly paying second job. Leftists have been branding him a failure for so long, I can understand why they have arse ache now they know he isn’t, never has been. Farage fir PM 2029!" You're assuming that the reform party and their current mps will still be aroing in 2029 | |||
| 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 |
"I like to know how much tax he’s paying on his earnings " Why? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I suppose it shows, if nothing else, that GB News is just a rich man’s propaganda tool rather than a business. Explain please. GB News has lost £76 million since it was launched, its biggest loss came in the 2023 financial year, £42.4 million. That’s not a sustainable business without it being propped up by someone, that someone happens to be Sir Paul Roderick Clucas Marshall." This is the nub of it really. It clearly isn’t a sustainable business and the obvious inference can only be that it is being used for nefarious purposes. It should be illegal to run any business (let alone a media organisation) at a loss on an ongoing basis. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It should be illegal to run any business (let alone a media organisation) at a loss on an ongoing basis." Why? If a backer has deep pockets and is willing to support it, that is their affair. Not ours. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" It should be illegal to run any business (let alone a media organisation) at a loss on an ongoing basis. Why? If a backer has deep pockets and is willing to support it, that is their affair. Not ours." I do agree. If it's a passion project, shouldn't matter if it's a passion for doing good, or a passion for sewing misinformation and division in the case of GBbies. Making a loss shouldn't be a factor. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I suppose it shows, if nothing else, that GB News is just a rich man’s propaganda tool rather than a business. Explain please. GB News has lost £76 million since it was launched, its biggest loss came in the 2023 financial year, £42.4 million. That’s not a sustainable business without it being propped up by someone, that someone happens to be Sir Paul Roderick Clucas Marshall. This is the nub of it really. It clearly isn’t a sustainable business and the obvious inference can only be that it is being used for nefarious purposes. It should be illegal to run any business (let alone a media organisation) at a loss on an ongoing basis." I don’t agree with that last part, people just need to see GB News for what it is, a tv channel with tiny ratings that is the propaganda tool of a very rich man. Some people may construe that paying Nigel Farage over a million pounds a year for a slot on a tv channel with tiny ratings is more than poor business sense of course. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Elected to parliament for the first time, great highly paying second job. Leftists have been branding him a failure for so long, I can understand why they have arse ache now they know he isn’t, never has been. Farage fir PM 2029! You're assuming that the reform party and their current mps will still be aroing in 2029 " No shit Sherlock!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Elected to parliament for the first time, great highly paying second job. Leftists have been branding him a failure for so long, I can understand why they have arse ache now they know he isn’t, never has been. Farage fir PM 2029! You're assuming that the reform party and their current mps will still be aroing in 2029 No shit Sherlock! "We he hasn't got off to a great start has he? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Elected to parliament for the first time, great highly paying second job. Leftists have been branding him a failure for so long, I can understand why they have arse ache now they know he isn’t, never has been. Farage fir PM 2029! You're assuming that the reform party and their current mps will still be aroing in 2029 No shit Sherlock!
We he hasn't got off to a great start has he?"But he spent a few days in the US to ‘promote Clacton on the world stage’ | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
""I like to know how much tax he’s paying on his earnings"" "Well, he doesn't pay any on the pension he gets from being an ex-MEP (not QUITE true, a token amount is deducted at source, the rest is transferred to the UK with a nice little high cost of living weighting. This net amount is NOT double-taxable in the UK, and he's exempt from any obligation to even declare it). Court of Justice ruling in Case C-558/10 but, of course, our Nige is against the Court of Justice, ECHR and all that rubbish..." Are you saying that Nigel should ignore Court of Justice rulings if he disagrees with them? Would you extend that to all politicians? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I suppose it shows, if nothing else, that GB News is just a rich man’s propaganda tool rather than a business. Explain please. GB News has lost £76 million since it was launched, its biggest loss came in the 2023 financial year, £42.4 million. That’s not a sustainable business without it being propped up by someone, that someone happens to be Sir Paul Roderick Clucas Marshall." Actual losses or didn't make the planned profit? I've worked for companies who project for example, a £50 million profit next year. If they only make £40 million profit, its recorded as a £10 million loss. Er, no, you still made £40 million. Now, if it costs £50 million to run the company and you only make £40 million, that's a definite loss. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I suppose it shows, if nothing else, that GB News is just a rich man’s propaganda tool rather than a business. Explain please. GB News has lost £76 million since it was launched, its biggest loss came in the 2023 financial year, £42.4 million. That’s not a sustainable business without it being propped up by someone, that someone happens to be Sir Paul Roderick Clucas Marshall. Actual losses or didn't make the planned profit? I've worked for companies who project for example, a £50 million profit next year. If they only make £40 million profit, its recorded as a £10 million loss. Er, no, you still made £40 million. Now, if it costs £50 million to run the company and you only make £40 million, that's a definite loss. "Actual losses, their outgoings were more than 10 times their earnings. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I suppose it shows, if nothing else, that GB News is just a rich man’s propaganda tool rather than a business. Explain please. GB News has lost £76 million since it was launched, its biggest loss came in the 2023 financial year, £42.4 million. That’s not a sustainable business without it being propped up by someone, that someone happens to be Sir Paul Roderick Clucas Marshall. Actual losses or didn't make the planned profit? I've worked for companies who project for example, a £50 million profit next year. If they only make £40 million profit, its recorded as a £10 million loss. Er, no, you still made £40 million. Now, if it costs £50 million to run the company and you only make £40 million, that's a definite loss.
Actual losses, their outgoings were more than 10 times their earnings."accumulate to speculate, even you are an avid watcher of fortunes, it is only a matter of time before you’re watching Farage on his show.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I suppose it shows, if nothing else, that GB News is just a rich man’s propaganda tool rather than a business. Explain please. GB News has lost £76 million since it was launched, its biggest loss came in the 2023 financial year, £42.4 million. That’s not a sustainable business without it being propped up by someone, that someone happens to be Sir Paul Roderick Clucas Marshall. Actual losses or didn't make the planned profit? I've worked for companies who project for example, a £50 million profit next year. If they only make £40 million profit, its recorded as a £10 million loss. Er, no, you still made £40 million. Now, if it costs £50 million to run the company and you only make £40 million, that's a definite loss.
Actual losses, their outgoings were more than 10 times their earnings."Well that is not sustainable from a business perspective long term. Even if its just a vanity project for a multi millionaire's propaganda machine, the constant loss on that scale will bring most people to their senses, financially if not politically. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I suppose it shows, if nothing else, that GB News is just a rich man’s propaganda tool rather than a business. Explain please. GB News has lost £76 million since it was launched, its biggest loss came in the 2023 financial year, £42.4 million. That’s not a sustainable business without it being propped up by someone, that someone happens to be Sir Paul Roderick Clucas Marshall. Actual losses or didn't make the planned profit? I've worked for companies who project for example, a £50 million profit next year. If they only make £40 million profit, its recorded as a £10 million loss. Er, no, you still made £40 million. Now, if it costs £50 million to run the company and you only make £40 million, that's a definite loss.
Actual losses, their outgoings were more than 10 times their earnings.
Well that is not sustainable from a business perspective long term.
Even if its just a vanity project for a multi millionaire's propaganda machine, the constant loss on that scale will bring most people to their senses, financially if not politically. "Sir Paul has invested another £40 million to cover the last financial year’s losses, but what you said does make me wonder if he is doing all the investing or is perhaps a conduit for money coming from elsewhere, maybe from outside the UK? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
""Personally I’d rather we had about a third of the MP’s we currently have and they got paid 3 times as much, with minimal expenses and be barred from additional employment / media work / book deals etc."" The issue isn’t what Farage earns. I don’t like the bloke or what he says, does, and stands for, but good luck to him making a living as a private individual BUT he is now an MP. He is no longer a private individual. He is a public servant. The rules should, IMO, be different. Don’t like it, don’t take the job (of MP). His job as an MP should be his sole focus. IMO they should be very well paid to ensure that focus is not compromised and compensate for not being allowed second jobs to attract the cleverest and the best. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" I suppose it shows, if nothing else, that GB News is just a rich man’s propaganda tool rather than a business. Explain please. GB News has lost £76 million since it was launched, its biggest loss came in the 2023 financial year, £42.4 million. That’s not a sustainable business without it being propped up by someone, that someone happens to be Sir Paul Roderick Clucas Marshall. This is the nub of it really. It clearly isn’t a sustainable business and the obvious inference can only be that it is being used for nefarious purposes. It should be illegal to run any business (let alone a media organisation) at a loss on an ongoing basis." The problem with this is that many sporting and other cultural institutions would have to close. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"@Nik M totally agree; "Personally I’d rather we had about a third of the MP’s we currently have and they got paid 3 times as much, with minimal expenses and be barred from additional employment / media work / book deals etc." The issue isn’t what Farage earns. I don’t like the bloke or what he says, does, and stands for, but good luck to him making a living as a private individual BUT he is now an MP. He is no longer a private individual. He is a public servant. The rules should, IMO, be different. Don’t like it, don’t take the job (of MP). His job as an MP should be his sole focus. IMO they should be very well paid to ensure that focus is not compromised and compensate for not being allowed second jobs to attract the cleverest and the best." Yeah I agree that their main focus should be doing the job of an MP but you can't really stop them having other business interests. Yeah a lot do public speaking etc which farage has done (ok once 10 people showed at 8 of them were his staff) and a lot have buy to let's and rent out commercial property. I always found it hypocritical that Tony Blair and has wife own 20 high end buy to let's when this should be against everything labour are supposed to represent (well old school labour anyway) However I believe that being an mp and working as a journalist or working for a news outlet is a major conflict of interest and should not be allowed! She my above post regarding Rebecca Brooks. And yes if an mp is found to be ignoring their public duties in favour of their other interests then it needs to be addressed. In the case of farage as already pointed out he has not addressed one query from his constituents and anyone that thought he was using Clacton for anything other than a stepping stone is stupid. We'll see how long it takes for them to catch on? But for the cult of farage 5 years might not even be long enough | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"@Nik M totally agree; "Personally I’d rather we had about a third of the MP’s we currently have and they got paid 3 times as much, with minimal expenses and be barred from additional employment / media work / book deals etc." The issue isn’t what Farage earns. I don’t like the bloke or what he says, does, and stands for, but good luck to him making a living as a private individual BUT he is now an MP. He is no longer a private individual. He is a public servant. The rules should, IMO, be different. Don’t like it, don’t take the job (of MP). His job as an MP should be his sole focus. IMO they should be very well paid to ensure that focus is not compromised and compensate for not being allowed second jobs to attract the cleverest and the best. Yeah I agree that their main focus should be doing the job of an MP but you can't really stop them having other business interests. Yeah a lot do public speaking etc which farage has done (ok once 10 people showed at 8 of them were his staff) and a lot have buy to let's and rent out commercial property. I always found it hypocritical that Tony Blair and has wife own 20 high end buy to let's when this should be against everything labour are supposed to represent (well old school labour anyway) However I believe that being an mp and working as a journalist or working for a news outlet is a major conflict of interest and should not be allowed! She my above post regarding Rebecca Brooks. And yes if an mp is found to be ignoring their public duties in favour of their other interests then it needs to be addressed. In the case of farage as already pointed out he has not addressed one query from his constituents and anyone that thought he was using Clacton for anything other than a stepping stone is stupid. We'll see how long it takes for them to catch on? But for the cult of farage 5 years might not even be long enough" 2nd jobs that are a conflict of interest = no way Investments are different but still requires scrutiny if they have influence over Govt policy that could benefit them personally. I say demonstrable minimum threshold of hours spent on MP and constituent business needed. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"@Nik M totally agree; "Personally I’d rather we had about a third of the MP’s we currently have and they got paid 3 times as much, with minimal expenses and be barred from additional employment / media work / book deals etc." The issue isn’t what Farage earns. I don’t like the bloke or what he says, does, and stands for, but good luck to him making a living as a private individual BUT he is now an MP. He is no longer a private individual. He is a public servant. The rules should, IMO, be different. Don’t like it, don’t take the job (of MP). His job as an MP should be his sole focus. IMO they should be very well paid to ensure that focus is not compromised and compensate for not being allowed second jobs to attract the cleverest and the best. Yeah I agree that their main focus should be doing the job of an MP but you can't really stop them having other business interests. Yeah a lot do public speaking etc which farage has done (ok once 10 people showed at 8 of them were his staff) and a lot have buy to let's and rent out commercial property. I always found it hypocritical that Tony Blair and has wife own 20 high end buy to let's when this should be against everything labour are supposed to represent (well old school labour anyway) However I believe that being an mp and working as a journalist or working for a news outlet is a major conflict of interest and should not be allowed! She my above post regarding Rebecca Brooks. And yes if an mp is found to be ignoring their public duties in favour of their other interests then it needs to be addressed. In the case of farage as already pointed out he has not addressed one query from his constituents and anyone that thought he was using Clacton for anything other than a stepping stone is stupid. We'll see how long it takes for them to catch on? But for the cult of farage 5 years might not even be long enough 2nd jobs that are a conflict of interest = no way Investments are different but still requires scrutiny if they have influence over Govt policy that could benefit them personally. I say demonstrable minimum threshold of hours spent on MP and constituent business needed." Yeah you're preaching to the choir here! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"@Nik M totally agree; "Personally I’d rather we had about a third of the MP’s we currently have and they got paid 3 times as much, with minimal expenses and be barred from additional employment / media work / book deals etc." The issue isn’t what Farage earns. I don’t like the bloke or what he says, does, and stands for, but good luck to him making a living as a private individual BUT he is now an MP. He is no longer a private individual. He is a public servant. The rules should, IMO, be different. Don’t like it, don’t take the job (of MP). His job as an MP should be his sole focus. IMO they should be very well paid to ensure that focus is not compromised and compensate for not being allowed second jobs to attract the cleverest and the best. Yeah I agree that their main focus should be doing the job of an MP but you can't really stop them having other business interests. Yeah a lot do public speaking etc which farage has done (ok once 10 people showed at 8 of them were his staff) and a lot have buy to let's and rent out commercial property. I always found it hypocritical that Tony Blair and has wife own 20 high end buy to let's when this should be against everything labour are supposed to represent (well old school labour anyway) However I believe that being an mp and working as a journalist or working for a news outlet is a major conflict of interest and should not be allowed! She my above post regarding Rebecca Brooks. And yes if an mp is found to be ignoring their public duties in favour of their other interests then it needs to be addressed. In the case of farage as already pointed out he has not addressed one query from his constituents and anyone that thought he was using Clacton for anything other than a stepping stone is stupid. We'll see how long it takes for them to catch on? But for the cult of farage 5 years might not even be long enough 2nd jobs that are a conflict of interest = no way Investments are different but still requires scrutiny if they have influence over Govt policy that could benefit them personally. I say demonstrable minimum threshold of hours spent on MP and constituent business needed." I would go further, I would ban MPs voting on anything they have a financial interest in. Rent properties out - you don’t get to vote on legislation relating to renting. Own shares in private healthcare companies - you don’t get to vote on health related matters. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"@Nik M totally agree; "Personally I’d rather we had about a third of the MP’s we currently have and they got paid 3 times as much, with minimal expenses and be barred from additional employment / media work / book deals etc." The issue isn’t what Farage earns. I don’t like the bloke or what he says, does, and stands for, but good luck to him making a living as a private individual BUT he is now an MP. He is no longer a private individual. He is a public servant. The rules should, IMO, be different. Don’t like it, don’t take the job (of MP). His job as an MP should be his sole focus. IMO they should be very well paid to ensure that focus is not compromised and compensate for not being allowed second jobs to attract the cleverest and the best. Yeah I agree that their main focus should be doing the job of an MP but you can't really stop them having other business interests. Yeah a lot do public speaking etc which farage has done (ok once 10 people showed at 8 of them were his staff) and a lot have buy to let's and rent out commercial property. I always found it hypocritical that Tony Blair and has wife own 20 high end buy to let's when this should be against everything labour are supposed to represent (well old school labour anyway) However I believe that being an mp and working as a journalist or working for a news outlet is a major conflict of interest and should not be allowed! She my above post regarding Rebecca Brooks. And yes if an mp is found to be ignoring their public duties in favour of their other interests then it needs to be addressed. In the case of farage as already pointed out he has not addressed one query from his constituents and anyone that thought he was using Clacton for anything other than a stepping stone is stupid. We'll see how long it takes for them to catch on? But for the cult of farage 5 years might not even be long enough 2nd jobs that are a conflict of interest = no way Investments are different but still requires scrutiny if they have influence over Govt policy that could benefit them personally. I say demonstrable minimum threshold of hours spent on MP and constituent business needed. I would go further, I would ban MPs voting on anything they have a financial interest in. Rent properties out - you don’t get to vote on legislation relating to renting. Own shares in private healthcare companies - you don’t get to vote on health related matters." Ah! Mps aren't required to declare buy to let's to parliament | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"@Nik M totally agree; "Personally I’d rather we had about a third of the MP’s we currently have and they got paid 3 times as much, with minimal expenses and be barred from additional employment / media work / book deals etc." The issue isn’t what Farage earns. I don’t like the bloke or what he says, does, and stands for, but good luck to him making a living as a private individual BUT he is now an MP. He is no longer a private individual. He is a public servant. The rules should, IMO, be different. Don’t like it, don’t take the job (of MP). His job as an MP should be his sole focus. IMO they should be very well paid to ensure that focus is not compromised and compensate for not being allowed second jobs to attract the cleverest and the best." I agree being an MP should be their sole purpose or at worst their primary purpose. If they are allowed to have these second jobs then a decent percentage earned from them should automatically go to charity. It highlights the problem is the rules | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m not in agreement with the idea MP’s shouldn’t have any other jobs or they can’t have a say on sectors they might own shares in, heaven forbid they invest in a pension… I’m also not in favour of increasing the salary, it will attract even more career politicians. They should be held accountable for what they’re elected for, this is what is missing, not turning up to take their seat, not spending time in their constituency, etc. if they don’t perform their duties they should be warned and after a 3rd warning the seat should be made available again. Make them accountable, not throw more money at them in the hope it produces better outcomes. " I like your more accountable approach but combined with other points. There is sometimes a huge conflict of interest. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m not in agreement with the idea MP’s shouldn’t have any other jobs or they can’t have a say on sectors they might own shares in, heaven forbid they invest in a pension… I’m also not in favour of increasing the salary, it will attract even more career politicians. They should be held accountable for what they’re elected for, this is what is missing, not turning up to take their seat, not spending time in their constituency, etc. if they don’t perform their duties they should be warned and after a 3rd warning the seat should be made available again. Make them accountable, not throw more money at them in the hope it produces better outcomes. " Aren't they elected to represent their constituents..? Does that not involve spending time in the constituency and parliament, otherwise how else would you measure it. Of course Ministers and cabinet members take on extra duties and responsibilities. They should be able to employ a extra person to take over their constituency duties. But the local level is how every MPs ability should be measured. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’m not in agreement with the idea MP’s shouldn’t have any other jobs or they can’t have a say on sectors they might own shares in, heaven forbid they invest in a pension… I’m also not in favour of increasing the salary, it will attract even more career politicians. They should be held accountable for what they’re elected for, this is what is missing, not turning up to take their seat, not spending time in their constituency, etc. if they don’t perform their duties they should be warned and after a 3rd warning the seat should be made available again. Make them accountable, not throw more money at them in the hope it produces better outcomes. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'd like all MPs to solely have that one job. I think it was a party that didn't win, that may have had it in their manifesto." The idea behind allowing MPs to have second jobs was to allow them to keep their professional licences. That way you could allow useful people like doctors, magistrates, and barristers to become MPs, and they could do the legal minimum of outside work to maintain their licence to practice. It does seem that some are bending the rules a little. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
