Do you want to discuss boring politics? (31 Viewers)

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
In London for those hours it’s crap. The sort of people you want as MPs can easily earn it elsewhere.
Your second sentence explains a lot in terms of the quality of todays typical MP.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Your second sentence explains a lot in terms of the quality of today’s typical MP.

Who would do it? It’s a proper shit job that gets a load of people frothing about you, your family attacked, police installing security alarms in your house and the press poring over your private life. When you can just go and do something stress free in the city and spend your cash how you like while your family is left alone.

It needs to be double what it is for it to be even close to worth it. We should pay far more and expect far better in return.
 

rob9872

Well-Known Member
Who would do it? It’s a proper shit job that gets a load of people frothing about you, your family attacked, police installing security alarms in your house and the press poring over your private life. When you can just go and do something stress free in the city and spend your cash how you like while your family is left alone.

It needs to be double what it is for it to be even close to worth it. We should pay far more and expect far better in return.
Some people who genuinely care about public service and not wealth would be a good start, but there are very few of those given the chance. For the Conservatives someone Heseltine hugely wealthy but clearly cared about public service. At the opposite end of the spectrum, Corbyn, who whilst I despised him, would never deny his staunch unwavering beliefs that he wanted a fairer and better place for all. Andy Burnham, David Davis, Mo Mowlam. There are others I could mention, but really over the 30+ so years I've shown an interest in politics, it's a pretty damning indictment that I couldn't immediately think of a long list from the 650 MP's per parliament.

For most who see it as a career it needs to pay ridiculous money. Whilst I know lots (eg Sunak who already have millions) don't need it, if you make it the equivalent of top City jobs then you will attract more of the better brains. It doesn't guarantee anything better but I do think the overall standard would go up. Let's face it, most aren't really in touch with the common people anyway and like most things in life you get what you pay for.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Some people who genuinely care about public service and not wealth would be a good start, but there are very few of those given the chance. For the Conservatives someone Heseltine hugely wealthy but clearly cared about public service. At the opposite end of the spectrum, Corbyn, who whilst I despised him, would never deny his staunch unwavering beliefs that he wanted a fairer and better place for all. Andy Burnham, David Davis, Mo Mowlam. There are others I could mention, but really over the 30+ so years I've shown an interest in politics, it's a pretty damning indictment that I couldn't immediately think of a long list from the 650 MP's per parliament.

For most who see it as a career it needs to pay ridiculous money. Whilst I know lots (eg Sunak who already have millions) don't need it, if you make it the equivalent of top City jobs then you will attract more of the better brains. It doesn't guarantee anything better but I do think the overall standard would go up. Let's face it, most aren't really in touch with the common people anyway and like most things in life you get what you pay for.

If you genuinely care you can do infinitely more with less shit and probably better pay elsewhere. You’d do more as chief exec of a council than an MP, or as owner of a couple of free schools, or running a health start up.

Corbyn is a good example TBH he just wants to attend meetings and protests and get paid for it. In 30 years he’s actually achieved very little and most MPs don’t.
 

SkyBlueCharlie9

Well-Known Member
A labour council planning to block redevelopment of a brown field site for housing. Dear oh dear, what will Keir, Angie and Rachel do about that.

Let assume nothing and permit development of the green belt and then throw the book at boomer nimbys protests and legal actions.

Havent researched the case but developers will probably appeal and then it goes to a government Planning Inspector. That's the acid test not local local government politicians.
 

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
How long can Reeves last?



I don't rate Reeves but I don't think that getting a month wrong on a Linkedin profile means anything. It's hardly an online CV for somebody who is currently Chancellor.

I think it's silly that she relies on time spent working for the BOE to justify herself really - just say what you're going to do as chancellor. Nobody asked Gideon Osborn what he'd done previously that was relevant to the position.

The second story is just speculative isn't it? Nothing to it at all, the BBC performing at tabloid level here.
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
How long can Reeves last?




This is absolutely desperate stuff.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
I don't rate Reeves but I don't think that getting a month wrong on a Linkedin profile means anything. It's hardly an online CV for somebody who is currently Chancellor.

I think it's silly that she relies on time spent working for the BOE to justify herself really - just say what you're going to do as chancellor. Nobody asked Gideon Osborn what he'd done previously that was relevant to the position.

The second story is just speculative isn't it? Nothing to it at all, the BBC performing at tabloid level here.

She’s get unending shit because she’s a woman. See the cringe “Rachel from accounts” stuff. I’m not surprised she feels she has to justify herself.

This story is beyond nothing though. Oh no your admin got a dropdown on LinkedIn wrong! 😮 Glad we got the BBC to “investigate” 🙄
 

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
This is absolutely desperate stuff.
The BBC featured her in those 2 articles on their main news web site, in fact the top 2 on the politics page.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
BBC reporting is pathetic. Listened to an interesting interview with Eric Schmidt (Google founder) on R4 this morning, covered lots of stuff, the interviewer asked him for his nightmare scenario. This was the only thing reported in the new bulletin after it “Google founder says AI to be used by rogue states”. Really gutter press stuff. The Tories really did a number on them under Johnson. Not sure Starmer has it in him to undo it tbh.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
Government handover is very different in the US and the UK and being out of power four years is very different from being out of power 14 years.

You can’t really plan 14 years ahead, especially when your plans are more than “let your rich mates do whatever they want”.
Presumably even a half wit could, over 14 years, look at what has gone well and what has gone badly And could consider what alternatives could have been pursued if not in opposition. That unfortunately assumes that Labour have anyone who scales the dizzy heights of being a half wit.

Forever the apologist, shmmeee
 
Last edited:

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
But but Reeves' LinkedIn profile



I had no idea she had claimed to be a top ranking health economist alongsidehttps://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-funding-to-fix-the-nhs-heres-how-it-will-be-spent#:~:text=The%20NHS%20needs%20both%20investment,%2C%20excluding%20COVID%2D19%20years. her other lies.
I had no idea she had claimed to be a top ranking health economist alongside her other lies. If I had lied on any medium and secured a job, I would expect to be out on my arse pretty quickly. Your response is another example of Labour being defended on the basis of anything and/ or nothing rather than applying some thought, consideration or being subject to public scrutiny as the party who has pledged to adhere to the highest standards of public office - and don’t seem to be cracking it.

To put into some context, that’s a reduction of 20,000 out of 7,480,000 in the last month (0.27%) That’s, say 5,000 a week compared to the governments target of 40,000 a week. So this is actually yet another fail. Presented as a success though by tye BBC.


On that basis, assuming there are no more additions to the waiting list than happened over the last few months, it will only take 31 years to clear the waiting list.

Yippeeeee! Possibly another 6 changes of government almost certainly 1.
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
I had no idea she had claimed to be a top ranking health economist alongside her other lies. If I had lied on any medium and secured a job, I would expect to be out on my arse pretty quickly. Your response is another example of Labour being defended on the basis of anything and/ or nothing rather than applying some thought, consideration or being subject to public scrutiny as the party who has pledged to adhere to the highest standards of public office - and don’t seem to be cracking it.

It's such a non story, it's absolutely fucking pathetic.

So her LinkedIn profile has some incorrect dates on it from 14 years before she got this job. It has absolutely nothing to do with her becoming Chancellor. Do you think Starmer was sat there appraising her LinkedIn profile before giving her the job?

The fact that people are having to resort to this kind of trivial nonsense says to me that actually they're probably doing a pretty good job of this is the 'best' these hacks can dig up.
 
Last edited:

PVA

Well-Known Member
Giving your pub landlord £40m of taxpayers money:

200.gif






Getting some dates wrong on your LinkedIn profile:

Angry Wrestling GIF
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
Who would do it? It’s a proper shit job that gets a load of people frothing about you, your family attacked, police installing security alarms in your house and the press poring over your private life. When you can just go and do something stress free in the city and spend your cash how you like while your family is left alone.

It needs to be double what it is for it to be even close to worth it. We should pay far more and expect far better in return.
Two comments/ questions if I may shmmeee.

Are all City jobs stress fee?

If we pay more, expecting better, what do you think the percentage chance is that that would be the outcome of the extra £75,000,000 p.a. (That’s probably minimum as i have applied double the current salary to 650 MPs and added a little for employer’s on costs. Presumably you would want better quality support staff - researchers etc - to support the better quality MPs.)
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
TBH it depends what she put in her actual CV, but as far as I know people don’t formally apply for cabinet positions but are considered for and offered roles by the PM. The PM will take all manner of things in to consideration and May have asked for some review of the background of individuals under consideration. Is it that great a leap to think that a LinkedIn employment history might not be taken in to account. She claimed to have been an economist- false. Her length of employment - false. You have missed out the alleged irregularities in expenses claim. reporting is pathetic. Listened to an interesting interview with Eric Schmidt (Google founder) on R4 this morning, covered lots of stuff, the interviewer asked him for his nightmare scenario. This was the only thing reported in the new bulletin after it “Google founder says AI to be used by rogue states”. Really gutter press stuff. The Tories really did a number on them under Johnson. Not sure Starmer has it in him to undo it tbh.
has Starmer got it in him to do anything.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
Giving your pub landlord £40m of taxpayers money:

200.gif



Potential Cost of appointing a Chancellor under false pretences - multiple £billions
Getting some dates wrong on your LinkedIn profile:Edited for allegations omitted (by chance oversight rather than malice - obviously😂)
in addition to claiming to have experience as an economist whilst also it being alleged there may have been some doubt about veracity about expense claims in the private sector.

Angry Wrestling GIF

Potential Cost of appointing a Chancellor under false pretences - multiple £billions
The above needs to be expanded to see the response to a rather blinkered response and consideration of two examples of alleged corruption.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
No one appoints a chancellor based on their LinkedIn Malc. How exactly do you think this works? 🤣
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
She’s get unending shit because she’s a woman. See the cringe “Rachel from accounts” stuff. I’m not surprised she feels she has to justify herself.

This story is beyond nothing though. Oh no your admin got a dropdown on LinkedIn wrong! 😮 Glad we got the BBC to “investigate” 🙄
I see, time to play the misogyny card.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
The saddest thing about the British right is how desperately it wants to be the American right and fails miserably.

There is far more to worry about than Brewdoge.


More platitudes and promises from Starmer and his pal.
 
Last edited:

SBAndy

Well-Known Member
The saddest thing about the British right is how desperately it wants to be the American right and fails miserably.


Use “extensive Freedom of Information requests to public bodies to delve deeply into how carelessly our tax money is being spent”.

A prime example being the necessity of civil servants to respond to spurious FoI request.
 

MalcSB

Well-Known Member
Use “extensive Freedom of Information requests to public bodies to delve deeply into how carelessly our tax money is being spent”.

A prime example being the necessity of civil servants to respond to spurious FoI request.
Would they be spurious? By what definition?

You should have seen some of the FOIs I used to have to deal with in the NHS. The time and thereby cost involved, on top of all the information and data required by governments of the day and initiated by the Labour government in 2001
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Some people who genuinely care about public service and not wealth would be a good start, but there are very few of those given the chance. For the Conservatives someone Heseltine hugely wealthy but clearly cared about public service. At the opposite end of the spectrum, Corbyn, who whilst I despised him, would never deny his staunch unwavering beliefs that he wanted a fairer and better place for all. Andy Burnham, David Davis, Mo Mowlam. There are others I could mention, but really over the 30+ so years I've shown an interest in politics, it's a pretty damning indictment that I couldn't immediately think of a long list from the 650 MP's per parliament.

For most who see it as a career it needs to pay ridiculous money. Whilst I know lots (eg Sunak who already have millions) don't need it, if you make it the equivalent of top City jobs then you will attract more of the better brains. It doesn't guarantee anything better but I do think the overall standard would go up. Let's face it, most aren't really in touch with the common people anyway and like most things in life you get what you pay for.
I'm not sure it would lead to better, or at least in terms of people doing the job for the 'right reasons'. Of course you can have the argument that paying less means MP's are more likely to look to feather their own nest in some way or another, but I don't think paying more is going to really make much of a difference in that respect. If you're looking out for yourself then you'll do that even if you are paid more.

If the one thing stopping someone trying to get elected now is the pay isn't good enough, I'd suggest they're not actually that bothered about the job in the first place.
 

rob9872

Well-Known Member
I'm not sure it would lead to better, or at least in terms of people doing the job for the 'right reasons'. Of course you can have the argument that paying less means MP's are more likely to look to feather their own nest in some way or another, but I don't think paying more is going to really make much of a difference in that respect. If you're looking out for yourself then you'll do that even if you are paid more.

If the one thing stopping someone trying to get elected now is the pay isn't good enough, I'd suggest they're not actually that bothered about the job in the first place.
In footballing terms do you want the player who has the talent to play for Man City but costs a lot and wants what he's worth, or the guy who's an electrician in the day and plays for Nuneaton, decent footballer, cares about his profession.

If the Man City guy doesn't get his offer, he doesn't go to Nuneaton, he goes to Saudi or the US. Similarly the prospective MP will work in the City if the MP salary doesn't stack up. They might be bothered and care but it's human to want to maximise earnings as no guarantee of reelection and like football could be a short career.
 

Mcbean

Well-Known Member
Enjoyed the clip yesterday of the farners blowing their horns over Starmer talking to builders and him being led away 🤣 none of the discussion on these new towns have spoken about where the people in them are going to work - also no discussion about infrastructure- we have trouble getting a doctors appointment already !
 

PVA

Well-Known Member
Enjoyed the clip yesterday of the farners blowing their horns over Starmer talking to builders and him being led away 🤣 none of the discussion on these new towns have spoken about where the people in them are going to work - also no discussion about infrastructure- we have trouble getting a doctors appointment already !

Hope all those farmers are fined for using red diesel.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
Would they be spurious? By what definition?

You should have seen some of the FOIs I used to have to deal with in the NHS. The time and thereby cost involved, on top of all the information and data required by governments of the day and initiated by the Labour government in 2001

A lot of them. My job used to involve sending them off to every council to try and get data out of them. If you read through a lot it’s either a business or some guy with a brain worm like “I DeMaNd To KnOw HoW mAnY BlAcK pEoPlE ate CrIsPs LaSt YeAr iN hUnTiNgDoN”.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top