| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... 15:39 - Nov 16 with 699 views | ElderGrizzly |
|  | | |  |
| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... on 16:40 - Nov 16 with 588 views | Swansea_Blue |
Is that his real account or a parody one? Really hard to tell the difference these days. |  |
| |
| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... on 17:06 - Nov 16 with 553 views | factual_blue |
| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... on 16:40 - Nov 16 by Swansea_Blue |
Is that his real account or a parody one? Really hard to tell the difference these days. |
A boris parody account would involve serious, thoughtful and intellectually robust postings.
A complete opposite, in other words, of the real one. |  |
| |
| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... on 17:10 - Nov 16 with 545 views | footers |
The Tories under 'boris' are so confused they may as well commit to the Labour manifesto and save themselves so many U-turn blushes. |  |
| |
| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... on 17:11 - Nov 16 with 531 views | factual_blue |
How many of his MPs will back this?
(I can hazard a guess...) | |
| |
| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... on 17:17 - Nov 16 with 514 views | ElderGrizzly |
| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... on 17:11 - Nov 16 by factual_blue |
How many of his MPs will back this?
(I can hazard a guess...) |
"Paid political consultants" has a lot of wriggle room to it.
A good question for a journalist to ask would be "how many MPs current jobs would be affected by this new ruling?"
I bet you can count the number on one hand or being generous a Norwich hand. | | | |
| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... on 17:26 - Nov 16 with 495 views | DanTheMan |
Whilst I think this is a step in the right direction (however small) I prefer the policy that Labour have set out on this.
Speaking to reporters, Sir Keir Starmer said his party would ban all second jobs, apart from "public service" roles or professions requiring registration.
Seems way less ambiguous. [Post edited 16 Nov 2021 17:26]
|  |
| |
| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... on 17:32 - Nov 16 with 480 views | footers |
| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... on 17:26 - Nov 16 by DanTheMan |
Whilst I think this is a step in the right direction (however small) I prefer the policy that Labour have set out on this.
Speaking to reporters, Sir Keir Starmer said his party would ban all second jobs, apart from "public service" roles or professions requiring registration.
Seems way less ambiguous. [Post edited 16 Nov 2021 17:26]
|
Agreed. If you sit on the board of charity, for example, that's much different to being a paid consultant for a private firm.
The system should only seek out people who want to represent their constituents' best interests, even if the pay is 'only' a paltry £82k per year (with subsidised rent, food, drink etc natch). | |
| |
| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... on 17:49 - Nov 16 with 444 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... on 17:10 - Nov 16 by footers |
The Tories under 'boris' are so confused they may as well commit to the Labour manifesto and save themselves so many U-turn blushes. |
I'd assumed it was deliberate tactic to play to their base initially (or just see what they can get away with) and then more quietly revert to what was sensible (being that the u-turns don't normally attract any attention in their compliant press). I could be completely wrong on that, but I don't see how they could genuinely read the room so badly on so many things. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... on 18:19 - Nov 16 with 389 views | jontysnut |
| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... on 17:32 - Nov 16 by footers |
Agreed. If you sit on the board of charity, for example, that's much different to being a paid consultant for a private firm.
The system should only seek out people who want to represent their constituents' best interests, even if the pay is 'only' a paltry £82k per year (with subsidised rent, food, drink etc natch). |
MPs who say they can't manage on 82k should be introduced to those MPs who say people on benefits should learn how to budget, eat porridge etc. |  | | |
| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... on 19:07 - Nov 16 with 358 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| Lobbying U-Turn Klaxon... on 17:32 - Nov 16 by footers |
Agreed. If you sit on the board of charity, for example, that's much different to being a paid consultant for a private firm.
The system should only seek out people who want to represent their constituents' best interests, even if the pay is 'only' a paltry £82k per year (with subsidised rent, food, drink etc natch). |
I am not certain. There are a lot of different charities with interests and that pay board members/consultants.
I would prefer an outright ban.
Maybe the registered professionals one holds some water. I think there should be a stipulation on hours spent to ensure that MPs are treating the position with the correct priority. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
