Euro 2020: MPs voted by proxy while at England v Denmark semi-final at Wembley, analysis suggests The government's Chief Whip Mark Spencer, whose role is to oversee party discipline, was among the group of MPs who attended the England v Denmark Euro 2020 semi-final match on 7 July.
Two cabinet ministers were among MPs who cast proxy votes while attending a Euro 2020 football game at Wembley rather than in person in the Commons, according to analysis.
They include Defence Secretary Ben Wallace, Policing Minister Kit Malthouse and the government's Chief Whip Mark Spencer - whose role is to oversee party discipline.
Meanwhile, former international trade secretary Liam Fox voted by proxy on numerous occasions while attending Wimbledon on 5 July, the analysis by POLITICO suggests.
I despise Johnson and this government. I would love the media to hold them to account more but this is a non story. They voted. Whether by proxy or in person, doesn't really matter.
Probably just another leaked story to take the attention away from all the corruption and incompetence.
It would be good if they spent a bit more time doing what they get paid for.
They do.
Randox, PPE contracts to mates...
Thats a good attempt at humour, but its not funny.
Like most humour, it has a serious side.
I don't object to MPs having a second job. But the rules should be:-
1. Make it public, both to the House and when seeking re-election 2. No 2nd job wherever there may be a conflict of interest 3. 2nd job. So hours and pay need to be less than pay/hours as an MP. Cos if not, the "2nd job" is as an MP
PS. Another fascinating concept for voting is "pairing".
If you have a need to be elsewhere when you are supposed to be voting, you can arrange for a "pairing" arrangement. So a Government MP and an opposition MP both miss the vote by agreement.
Without going into a long list of rules regarding second jobs, you have to start with the simple criteria that no second job should be allowed to interfere with their job as an MP.
One thing that is guaranteed is that once the new rules are put in place, it wont take them long to find a way around them.
The easiest thing to do would be to ban second jobs. Appealing to people that just want to be MPs wouldnt be a bad thing.
The new rules look like they will only ban Consultancy positions. Only about 10 MPs have these-most are Directors/Employees/Trustees.
Very difficult to totally ban 2nd jobs. Many MPs agree to be volunteers for constituent's businesses/charities. Many new MPs need to wind down outside interests. Some are associated with sponsor Unions, or are Silent Partners in businesses.
IMHO would be far better to concentrate on transparency and ensuring no conflict of interest. That should be achievable.
Not sure how they fit in a second job.
Anonymous Answered May 24, 2014 Certainly from my own experience of working for an MP, whilst Parliament is sitting an MP can work around 70 hours per week, sometimes more. During recess the working week is much the same - at least six days, with trying to keep much of Sunday for themselves (although occasional constituency engagements may happen), so the week's working hours may be more like 40-50. When Parliament is sitting, MPs usually travel to London on the Sunday afternoon or evening (many will return to constituencies on the Thursday evening), so it's uncommon that there is ever a completely free day in the week (holidays excepted, although work is still taken and MPs will still keep in contact with their office and colleagues).
The Hansard Society published a report a while back which gave some insight into the working hours of new MPs: New MPs struggle with work/life balance - but most see politics as a long-term career
Euro 2020: MPs voted by proxy while at England v Denmark semi-final at Wembley, analysis suggests The government's Chief Whip Mark Spencer, whose role is to oversee party discipline, was among the group of MPs who attended the England v Denmark Euro 2020 semi-final match on 7 July.
Two cabinet ministers were among MPs who cast proxy votes while attending a Euro 2020 football game at Wembley rather than in person in the Commons, according to analysis.
They include Defence Secretary Ben Wallace, Policing Minister Kit Malthouse and the government's Chief Whip Mark Spencer - whose role is to oversee party discipline.
Meanwhile, former international trade secretary Liam Fox voted by proxy on numerous occasions while attending Wimbledon on 5 July, the analysis by POLITICO suggests.
I despise Johnson and this government. I would love the media to hold them to account more but this is a non story. They voted. Whether by proxy or in person, doesn't really matter.
Probably just another leaked story to take the attention away from all the corruption and incompetence.
It would be good if they spent a bit more time doing what they get paid for.
They do.
Randox, PPE contracts to mates...
Thats a good attempt at humour, but its not funny.
Like most humour, it has a serious side.
I don't object to MPs having a second job. But the rules should be:-
1. Make it public, both to the House and when seeking re-election 2. No 2nd job wherever there may be a conflict of interest 3. 2nd job. So hours and pay need to be less than pay/hours as an MP. Cos if not, the "2nd job" is as an MP
PS. Another fascinating concept for voting is "pairing".
If you have a need to be elsewhere when you are supposed to be voting, you can arrange for a "pairing" arrangement. So a Government MP and an opposition MP both miss the vote by agreement.
Without going into a long list of rules regarding second jobs, you have to start with the simple criteria that no second job should be allowed to interfere with their job as an MP.
One thing that is guaranteed is that once the new rules are put in place, it wont take them long to find a way around them.
The easiest thing to do would be to ban second jobs. Appealing to people that just want to be MPs wouldnt be a bad thing.
The new rules look like they will only ban Consultancy positions. Only about 10 MPs have these-most are Directors/Employees/Trustees.
They will probably just invent a new name for a consultancy.
Very difficult to totally ban 2nd jobs. Many MPs agree to be volunteers for constituent's businesses/charities.
I wouldnt see that volunteering would count as a second job. I think the definition should be work that you get paid for.
Many new MPs need to wind down outside interests. Some are associated with sponsor Unions, or are Silent Partners in businesses.
New MPs could be given say 12 months to tie up their affairs. Being a silent partner should be ok.
IMHO would be far better to concentrate on transparency and ensuring no conflict of interest. That should be achievable.
Transparency is of the utmost importance.
The problem with designing a set of rules, is that they will always seek a way to circumvent them. Geoffrey Cox will argue that he didnt break the rules, and this would probably be true. Although I think it is impossible to approve of his actions. I think the house rental rules were put in place to save money on MPs hotel bills, when working at Westminster. They were surely not designed to allow MPs to rent their own homes out, and claim back the rental of an alternative property on expenses, even when they are not in the country. So they profit from the rent they receive, in addition to the appreciation of the value of the property that they own. In Geoffrey Coxs case, hotel bills would have been far cheaper, because he was never there.
The biggest problem with second jobs is that being an MP is not a 9 til 5 job. They dont have set hours. So committing to a second job is difficult. I get the feeling that many of them would prioritise their second job, and making more money, if there came a time when their obligation to Parliament clashed with their committment to their second job. Some feel its more important to attend a football match, or sun themselves abroad, rather than attending The House of Commons.
Sajid Javid accused of breaking rules over shares in US healthcare firm
Labour has accused Health Secretary Sajid Javid of breaking the ministerial code over shares in a US healthcare firm.
Before becoming Health Secretary, Mr Javid was paid £150,000 a year as an advisor for healthcare Artificial Intelligence (AI) firm c3.ai.
His payment package also included share options for 666.7 shares per month - which had a market value of £45,000 at the time he declared them in November 2020.
While he stood down from the job when he became Health Secretary, he retained the share options, according to the Register of Members' Interests.
But in September, Mr Javid gave a speech announcing the use of AI in the NHS would reduce waiting lists for patients.
Euro 2020: MPs voted by proxy while at England v Denmark semi-final at Wembley, analysis suggests The government's Chief Whip Mark Spencer, whose role is to oversee party discipline, was among the group of MPs who attended the England v Denmark Euro 2020 semi-final match on 7 July.
Two cabinet ministers were among MPs who cast proxy votes while attending a Euro 2020 football game at Wembley rather than in person in the Commons, according to analysis.
They include Defence Secretary Ben Wallace, Policing Minister Kit Malthouse and the government's Chief Whip Mark Spencer - whose role is to oversee party discipline.
Meanwhile, former international trade secretary Liam Fox voted by proxy on numerous occasions while attending Wimbledon on 5 July, the analysis by POLITICO suggests.
I despise Johnson and this government. I would love the media to hold them to account more but this is a non story. They voted. Whether by proxy or in person, doesn't really matter.
Probably just another leaked story to take the attention away from all the corruption and incompetence.
It would be good if they spent a bit more time doing what they get paid for.
They do.
Randox, PPE contracts to mates...
Fresh prospect of criminal inquiry for Boris Johnson after Jennifer Arcuri agrees to assist ethics watchdog
Euro 2020: MPs voted by proxy while at England v Denmark semi-final at Wembley, analysis suggests The government's Chief Whip Mark Spencer, whose role is to oversee party discipline, was among the group of MPs who attended the England v Denmark Euro 2020 semi-final match on 7 July.
Two cabinet ministers were among MPs who cast proxy votes while attending a Euro 2020 football game at Wembley rather than in person in the Commons, according to analysis.
They include Defence Secretary Ben Wallace, Policing Minister Kit Malthouse and the government's Chief Whip Mark Spencer - whose role is to oversee party discipline.
Meanwhile, former international trade secretary Liam Fox voted by proxy on numerous occasions while attending Wimbledon on 5 July, the analysis by POLITICO suggests.
I despise Johnson and this government. I would love the media to hold them to account more but this is a non story. They voted. Whether by proxy or in person, doesn't really matter.
Probably just another leaked story to take the attention away from all the corruption and incompetence.
It would be good if they spent a bit more time doing what they get paid for.
They do.
Randox, PPE contracts to mates...
Thats a good attempt at humour, but its not funny.
PS. Another fascinating concept for voting is "pairing".
If you have a need to be elsewhere when you are supposed to be voting, you can arrange for a "pairing" arrangement. So a Government MP and an opposition MP both miss the vote by agreement.
Pairing doesnt always work.
HE’S WHIPPED Chief Whip Julian Smith under massive pressure to resign after Tory MP accuses him of deceiving Theresa May in vote cheating row Ahead of crunch votes on Tuesday which could have brought down the Government, The Sun has established Mr Smith gave orders to as many as FIVE Tory MPs to break their pairings – deemed a serious breach of honour
Euro 2020: MPs voted by proxy while at England v Denmark semi-final at Wembley, analysis suggests The government's Chief Whip Mark Spencer, whose role is to oversee party discipline, was among the group of MPs who attended the England v Denmark Euro 2020 semi-final match on 7 July.
Two cabinet ministers were among MPs who cast proxy votes while attending a Euro 2020 football game at Wembley rather than in person in the Commons, according to analysis.
They include Defence Secretary Ben Wallace, Policing Minister Kit Malthouse and the government's Chief Whip Mark Spencer - whose role is to oversee party discipline.
Meanwhile, former international trade secretary Liam Fox voted by proxy on numerous occasions while attending Wimbledon on 5 July, the analysis by POLITICO suggests.
I despise Johnson and this government. I would love the media to hold them to account more but this is a non story. They voted. Whether by proxy or in person, doesn't really matter.
Probably just another leaked story to take the attention away from all the corruption and incompetence.
It would be good if they spent a bit more time doing what they get paid for.
They do.
Randox, PPE contracts to mates...
Thats a good attempt at humour, but its not funny.
PS. Another fascinating concept for voting is "pairing".
If you have a need to be elsewhere when you are supposed to be voting, you can arrange for a "pairing" arrangement. So a Government MP and an opposition MP both miss the vote by agreement.
Pairing doesnt always work.
HE’S WHIPPED Chief Whip Julian Smith under massive pressure to resign after Tory MP accuses him of deceiving Theresa May in vote cheating row Ahead of crunch votes on Tuesday which could have brought down the Government, The Sun has established Mr Smith gave orders to as many as FIVE Tory MPs to break their pairings – deemed a serious breach of honour
Let's face it. There is no tradition that this Conservative Govt will not spit on purely for short term gain.
Likewise, the other headlines today run true to form. Telegraph runs with story that he needs to concentrate on picking on poor foreigners (migrants)-presumably to divert from the trousering of cash for his mates.
Priti Patel calls the Home Office 'not fit for purpose' as another 600 migrants cross the Channel in a day - but civil servants label her management style 'moronic'
Priti Patel's (pictured top-left inset) feud with her own officials has deepened after the Home Secretary privately described her department as 'not fit for purpose', and civil servants labelled her management style as 'moronic'. The Mail on Sunday can reveal that Ms Patel considered writing a letter to Cabinet Secretary Simon Case, in which she planned to lambast the officials' failure to get a grip of the migrant boat crisis. The letter was not sent but officials got wind of it and hit back, telling this newspaper her behaviour is 'erratic' and 'self-serving'. Pictured main and right: Migrants arrive on British shores.
Boris Johnson is accused of threatening revenge on Sir Lindsay Hoyle by mouthing 'not for long' after Speaker humiliated him with scolding in Commons insisting 'I'm in charge'
Boris Johnson (right) is said to have threatened swift revenge on Sir Lindsay Hoyle for humiliating him in the Commons last week. The Prime Minister allegedly muttered 'Not for long' (bottom left) after the Speaker angrily told him: 'In this House, I am in charge'(top left). The claim comes amid a dramatic worsening of relations between Sir Lindsay and No10. In stormy scenes last week, the Speaker repeatedly rebuked Mr Johnson for trying to answer questions about Tory sleaze by challenging Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer's own record of topping up his MP's salary with outside work as a lawyer. Sir Lindsay first reminded Mr Johnson that 'it is Prime Minister's Questions - not Leader of the Opposition's Questions'. But when the PM tried again to ask questions about Sir Keir's legal work, the Speaker exploded by ordering him to 'Sit down!'. He then declared: 'I am not going to be challenged. You may be the Prime Minister of this country, but in this House I am in charge.'
Priti Patel calls the Home Office 'not fit for purpose' as another 600 migrants cross the Channel in a day - but civil servants label her management style 'moronic'
Priti Patel's (pictured top-left inset) feud with her own officials has deepened after the Home Secretary privately described her department as 'not fit for purpose', and civil servants labelled her management style as 'moronic'. The Mail on Sunday can reveal that Ms Patel considered writing a letter to Cabinet Secretary Simon Case, in which she planned to lambast the officials' failure to get a grip of the migrant boat crisis. The letter was not sent but officials got wind of it and hit back, telling this newspaper her behaviour is 'erratic' and 'self-serving'. Pictured main and right: Migrants arrive on British shores.
If her Department really is not fit for purpose, then it is because of insufficient money spent, particularly on employing/ training for the Border Force. An organisation set up in 2012, and (for the first time) accountable to the Home Secretary via the Immigration Minister, rather than a Civil Servant.
I look forward to her resignation speech, and her acceptance that any mess is of her own making.
PS-the current Director-General, Paul Lincoln, was appointed by the Govt. Previous experience of Immigration/Customs? 0. Same for his predecessor. Farce.
Euro 2020: MPs voted by proxy while at England v Denmark semi-final at Wembley, analysis suggests The government's Chief Whip Mark Spencer, whose role is to oversee party discipline, was among the group of MPs who attended the England v Denmark Euro 2020 semi-final match on 7 July.
Two cabinet ministers were among MPs who cast proxy votes while attending a Euro 2020 football game at Wembley rather than in person in the Commons, according to analysis.
They include Defence Secretary Ben Wallace, Policing Minister Kit Malthouse and the government's Chief Whip Mark Spencer - whose role is to oversee party discipline.
Meanwhile, former international trade secretary Liam Fox voted by proxy on numerous occasions while attending Wimbledon on 5 July, the analysis by POLITICO suggests.
I despise Johnson and this government. I would love the media to hold them to account more but this is a non story. They voted. Whether by proxy or in person, doesn't really matter.
Probably just another leaked story to take the attention away from all the corruption and incompetence.
It would be good if they spent a bit more time doing what they get paid for.
They do.
Randox, PPE contracts to mates...
Thats a good attempt at humour, but its not funny.
PS. Another fascinating concept for voting is "pairing".
If you have a need to be elsewhere when you are supposed to be voting, you can arrange for a "pairing" arrangement. So a Government MP and an opposition MP both miss the vote by agreement.
Pairing doesnt always work.
HE’S WHIPPED Chief Whip Julian Smith under massive pressure to resign after Tory MP accuses him of deceiving Theresa May in vote cheating row Ahead of crunch votes on Tuesday which could have brought down the Government, The Sun has established Mr Smith gave orders to as many as FIVE Tory MPs to break their pairings – deemed a serious breach of honour
Let's face it. There is no tradition that this Conservative Govt will not spit on purely for short term gain.
Likewise, the other headlines today run true to form. Telegraph runs with story that he needs to concentrate on picking on poor foreigners (migrants)-presumably to divert from the trousering of cash for his mates.
Arcuri may prove to be interesting.
She may well be. They seem to be getting increasingly bogged down on a daily basis.
Priti Patel calls the Home Office 'not fit for purpose' as another 600 migrants cross the Channel in a day - but civil servants label her management style 'moronic'
Priti Patel's (pictured top-left inset) feud with her own officials has deepened after the Home Secretary privately described her department as 'not fit for purpose', and civil servants labelled her management style as 'moronic'. The Mail on Sunday can reveal that Ms Patel considered writing a letter to Cabinet Secretary Simon Case, in which she planned to lambast the officials' failure to get a grip of the migrant boat crisis. The letter was not sent but officials got wind of it and hit back, telling this newspaper her behaviour is 'erratic' and 'self-serving'. Pictured main and right: Migrants arrive on British shores.
If her Department really is not fit for purpose, then it is because of insufficient money spent, particularly on employing/ training for the Border Force. An organisation set up in 2012, and (for the first time) accountable to the Home Secretary via the Immigration Minister, rather than a Civil Servant.
I look forward to her resignation speech, and her acceptance that any mess is of her own making.
PS-the current Director-General, Paul Lincoln, was appointed by the Govt. Previous experience of Immigration/Customs? 0. Same for his predecessor. Farce.
Any solution will require new legislation, and cooperation from the EU. I am in favour of our country taking our fair share of migrants, but there has to be some control. Pushing back migrants boats is apparently against maritime law, and would probably result in loss of life, therefore not the answer. The problem is clearly that to complete an asylum application you have to be in the UK. If this was not the case, then the people traffickers are out of business. The EU has similar problems. The rule is that they must apply for asylum in the first safe country that they arrive in. If this was amended to allow them to apply for asylum in any country of their choice, but from the first safe country. Failure to do so would mean they would be returned. Applications from those arriving illegally shouldnt be considered.
We would then have to deal with the applications in a timely fashion. The Liverpool bomber apparently completed an asylum application in 2015.
Another resignation from the Home Secretary would be most welcome.
Priti Patel calls the Home Office 'not fit for purpose' as another 600 migrants cross the Channel in a day - but civil servants label her management style 'moronic'
Priti Patel's (pictured top-left inset) feud with her own officials has deepened after the Home Secretary privately described her department as 'not fit for purpose', and civil servants labelled her management style as 'moronic'. The Mail on Sunday can reveal that Ms Patel considered writing a letter to Cabinet Secretary Simon Case, in which she planned to lambast the officials' failure to get a grip of the migrant boat crisis. The letter was not sent but officials got wind of it and hit back, telling this newspaper her behaviour is 'erratic' and 'self-serving'. Pictured main and right: Migrants arrive on British shores.
If her Department really is not fit for purpose, then it is because of insufficient money spent, particularly on employing/ training for the Border Force. An organisation set up in 2012, and (for the first time) accountable to the Home Secretary via the Immigration Minister, rather than a Civil Servant.
I look forward to her resignation speech, and her acceptance that any mess is of her own making.
PS-the current Director-General, Paul Lincoln, was appointed by the Govt. Previous experience of Immigration/Customs? 0. Same for his predecessor. Farce.
Any solution will require new legislation, and cooperation from the EU. I am in favour of our country taking our fair share of migrants, but there has to be some control. Pushing back migrants boats is apparently against maritime law, and would probably result in loss of life, therefore not the answer. The problem is clearly that to complete an asylum application you have to be in the UK. If this was not the case, then the people traffickers are out of business. The EU has similar problems. The rule is that they must apply for asylum in the first safe country that they arrive in. If this was amended to allow them to apply for asylum in any country of their choice, but from the first safe country. Failure to do so would mean they would be returned. Applications from those arriving illegally shouldnt be considered.
We would then have to deal with the applications in a timely fashion. The Liverpool bomber apparently completed an asylum application in 2015.
Another resignation from the Home Secretary would be most welcome.
Completely agree with this. Both the UK and the vast majority of the EU are behaving appallingly in relation to this.
Contrary to the Far Right mantra, we are not taking on our fair share in relation to migrants. On 2 separate matters.
Firstly, in relation to people fleeing for their lives. Let's take Syria, for starters. The figures are shameful. Many of the major refugee camps are in neighbouring countries. That we are steadfastly ignoring. Turkey 3.5 million, Lebanon (which has the population of Scotland normally) 944,000, Jordan 676,000, Iraq 253,000.
But most of the richest nations are providing neither financial help, or resettlement. There are exceptions-Germany 532,000, the relatively small Austria 49,000, Netherlands 32,000. Us? Less than 13,000. For victims of a war that, lest we forget, the UK has been supplying weapons to both sides in Syria and, at differing times, supporting both sides.
Then look at economic migrants. Let's leave to 1 side whether we should accept these people or not (personally, I would like to see a proper points-based system, whereby we take economic migrants that make economic sense for the UK). Trying to blame France for this is ludicrous. It is our actions that are lining the pockets of the gangmasters.
Imagine the roles were reversed. Thousands of people landed in the UK. French speakers, with family ties in France. Who wanted to apply for asylum in France. Do you think we would be saying-"it's OK France. We'll pay. It's our problem"? We have taken back control of our borders. So-man up, and deal with a border problem. Send some of our Border Force to France (which, incidentally, we have been doing since way before we joined the EU), or pay the French to deal with our problem.
The EU are no better. Why is there no co-ordinated relief effort? Why dump problems on Lebanon? Or Belarus?
Priti Patel calls the Home Office 'not fit for purpose' as another 600 migrants cross the Channel in a day - but civil servants label her management style 'moronic'
Priti Patel's (pictured top-left inset) feud with her own officials has deepened after the Home Secretary privately described her department as 'not fit for purpose', and civil servants labelled her management style as 'moronic'. The Mail on Sunday can reveal that Ms Patel considered writing a letter to Cabinet Secretary Simon Case, in which she planned to lambast the officials' failure to get a grip of the migrant boat crisis. The letter was not sent but officials got wind of it and hit back, telling this newspaper her behaviour is 'erratic' and 'self-serving'. Pictured main and right: Migrants arrive on British shores.
If her Department really is not fit for purpose, then it is because of insufficient money spent, particularly on employing/ training for the Border Force. An organisation set up in 2012, and (for the first time) accountable to the Home Secretary via the Immigration Minister, rather than a Civil Servant.
I look forward to her resignation speech, and her acceptance that any mess is of her own making.
PS-the current Director-General, Paul Lincoln, was appointed by the Govt. Previous experience of Immigration/Customs? 0. Same for his predecessor. Farce.
Any solution will require new legislation, and cooperation from the EU. I am in favour of our country taking our fair share of migrants, but there has to be some control. Pushing back migrants boats is apparently against maritime law, and would probably result in loss of life, therefore not the answer. The problem is clearly that to complete an asylum application you have to be in the UK. If this was not the case, then the people traffickers are out of business. The EU has similar problems. The rule is that they must apply for asylum in the first safe country that they arrive in. If this was amended to allow them to apply for asylum in any country of their choice, but from the first safe country. Failure to do so would mean they would be returned. Applications from those arriving illegally shouldnt be considered.
We would then have to deal with the applications in a timely fashion. The Liverpool bomber apparently completed an asylum application in 2015.
Another resignation from the Home Secretary would be most welcome.
Completely agree with this. Both the UK and the vast majority of the EU are behaving appallingly in relation to this.
Contrary to the Far Right mantra, we are not taking on our fair share in relation to migrants. On 2 separate matters.
Firstly, in relation to people fleeing for their lives. Let's take Syria, for starters. The figures are shameful. Many of the major refugee camps are in neighbouring countries. That we are steadfastly ignoring. Turkey 3.5 million, Lebanon (which has the population of Scotland normally) 944,000, Jordan 676,000, Iraq 253,000.
But most of the richest nations are providing neither financial help, or resettlement. There are exceptions-Germany 532,000, the relatively small Austria 49,000, Netherlands 32,000. Us? Less than 13,000. For victims of a war that, lest we forget, the UK has been supplying weapons to both sides in Syria and, at differing times, supporting both sides.
Then look at economic migrants. Let's leave to 1 side whether we should accept these people or not (personally, I would like to see a proper points-based system, whereby we take economic migrants that make economic sense for the UK). Trying to blame France for this is ludicrous. It is our actions that are lining the pockets of the gangmasters.
Imagine the roles were reversed. Thousands of people landed in the UK. French speakers, with family ties in France. Who wanted to apply for asylum in France. Do you think we would be saying-"it's OK France. We'll pay. It's our problem"? We have taken back control of our borders. So-man up, and deal with a border problem. Send some of our Border Force to France (which, incidentally, we have been doing since way before we joined the EU), or pay the French to deal with our problem.
The EU are no better. Why is there no co-ordinated relief effort? Why dump problems on Lebanon? Or Belarus?
I would agree. Its a huge f..k up, that we have all created. They all arrive in a small number of countries. The current rules are unfair to them, and dont work anyway. These countries are probably happy when thousands of the asylum seekers/migrants escape and wander through Europe to apply for asylum elsewhere. Why wouldnt they be? The people traffickers are only in business because the current rules dont work. They couldnt survive if we put in place a set of rules that actually worked. It is wrong that anyone should benefit from breaking the rules.
I have followed every General Election since 1974. At every single one of those elections, the Conservative Party have attacked the Labour Party in 1 of 2 ways. Either:-
(1) The Labour leader is a lefty nutter who will ruin the country (Foot, Corbyn etc); or (2) The minute you elect one who can't be portrayed as a lefty nutter, then there is a scare story that there is someone waiting in the wings waiting to take over in some sort of Communist plot
Number of elected Labour PMs that have been replaced while PM? 2. Ever. Wilson in 1976, cos he chose to go once diagnosed with dementia. And Blair in 2005, handing over to Brown.
The last 2 Conservative PMs to be replaced shortly after an election are Cameron in 2016, and May in 2019. Removed due to the unelected 1922 Committee.
Ever felt conned?
We all must go to Peppa Pig World, says UK PM Johnson in speech flap
Comments
Anonymous
Answered May 24, 2014
Certainly from my own experience of working for an MP, whilst Parliament is sitting an MP can work around 70 hours per week, sometimes more. During recess the working week is much the same - at least six days, with trying to keep much of Sunday for themselves (although occasional constituency engagements may happen), so the week's working hours may be more like 40-50. When Parliament is sitting, MPs usually travel to London on the Sunday afternoon or evening (many will return to constituencies on the Thursday evening), so it's uncommon that there is ever a completely free day in the week (holidays excepted, although work is still taken and MPs will still keep in contact with their office and colleagues).
The Hansard Society published a report a while back which gave some insight into the working hours of new MPs: New MPs struggle with work/life balance - but most see politics as a long-term career
https://www.quora.com/How-many-hours-do-British-MPs-work-per-year-compared-to-avg-full-time-employee
The problem with designing a set of rules, is that they will always seek a way to circumvent them.
Geoffrey Cox will argue that he didnt break the rules, and this would probably be true.
Although I think it is impossible to approve of his actions.
I think the house rental rules were put in place to save money on MPs hotel bills, when working at Westminster.
They were surely not designed to allow MPs to rent their own homes out, and claim back the rental of an alternative property on expenses, even when they are not in the country.
So they profit from the rent they receive, in addition to the appreciation of the value of the property that they own.
In Geoffrey Coxs case, hotel bills would have been far cheaper, because he was never there.
The biggest problem with second jobs is that being an MP is not a 9 til 5 job.
They dont have set hours.
So committing to a second job is difficult.
I get the feeling that many of them would prioritise their second job, and making more money, if there came a time when their obligation to Parliament clashed with their committment to their second job.
Some feel its more important to attend a football match, or sun themselves abroad, rather than attending The House of Commons.
Labour has accused Health Secretary Sajid Javid of breaking the ministerial code over shares in a US healthcare firm.
Before becoming Health Secretary, Mr Javid was paid £150,000 a year as an advisor for healthcare Artificial Intelligence (AI) firm c3.ai.
His payment package also included share options for 666.7 shares per month - which had a market value of £45,000 at the time he declared them in November 2020.
While he stood down from the job when he became Health Secretary, he retained the share options, according to the Register of Members' Interests.
But in September, Mr Javid gave a speech announcing the use of AI in the NHS would reduce waiting lists for patients.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/sajid-javid-accused-of-breaking-rules-over-shares-in-us-healthcare-firm/ar-AAQUlE3?ocid=msedgntp
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/fresh-prospect-of-criminal-inquiry-for-boris-johnson-after-jennifer-arcuri-agrees-to-assist-ethics-watchdog/ar-AAQWujL?ocid=msedgntp
Government resisting release of papers about meetings with Gove-linked PPE firm
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/government-resisting-release-of-papers-about-meetings-with-gove-linked-ppe-firm/ar-AAQW4vW?ocid=msedgntp
Boris Johnson told: dump plan for social care charges or face Tory rebellion
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/boris-johnson-told-dump-plan-for-social-care-charges-or-face-tory-rebellion/ar-AAQWrQK?ocid=msedgntp
HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail: George Osborne predicts Boris Johnson will U-turn on downgrade after outcry
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/hs2-and-northern-powerhouse-rail-george-osborne-predicts-boris-johnson-will-u-turn-on-downgrade-after-outcry/ar-AAQVQD7?ocid=msedgntp
HE’S WHIPPED Chief Whip Julian Smith under massive pressure to resign after Tory MP accuses him of deceiving Theresa May in vote cheating row
Ahead of crunch votes on Tuesday which could have brought down the Government, The Sun has established Mr Smith gave orders to as many as FIVE Tory MPs to break their pairings – deemed a serious breach of honour
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/6818384/chief-whip-julian-smith-cheating-row/amp/
Let's face it. There is no tradition that this Conservative Govt will not spit on purely for short term gain.
Likewise, the other headlines today run true to form. Telegraph runs with story that he needs to concentrate on picking on poor foreigners (migrants)-presumably to divert from the trousering of cash for his mates.
Arcuri may prove to be interesting.
Priti Patel's (pictured top-left inset) feud with her own officials has deepened after the Home Secretary privately described her department as 'not fit for purpose', and civil servants labelled her management style as 'moronic'. The Mail on Sunday can reveal that Ms Patel considered writing a letter to Cabinet Secretary Simon Case, in which she planned to lambast the officials' failure to get a grip of the migrant boat crisis. The letter was not sent but officials got wind of it and hit back, telling this newspaper her behaviour is 'erratic' and 'self-serving'. Pictured main and right: Migrants arrive on British shores.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10225137/Priti-Patels-feud-civil-servants-deepens.html
Boris Johnson (right) is said to have threatened swift revenge on Sir Lindsay Hoyle for humiliating him in the Commons last week. The Prime Minister allegedly muttered 'Not for long' (bottom left) after the Speaker angrily told him: 'In this House, I am in charge'(top left). The claim comes amid a dramatic worsening of relations between Sir Lindsay and No10. In stormy scenes last week, the Speaker repeatedly rebuked Mr Johnson for trying to answer questions about Tory sleaze by challenging Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer's own record of topping up his MP's salary with outside work as a lawyer. Sir Lindsay first reminded Mr Johnson that 'it is Prime Minister's Questions - not Leader of the Opposition's Questions'. But when the PM tried again to ask questions about Sir Keir's legal work, the Speaker exploded by ordering him to 'Sit down!'. He then declared: 'I am not going to be challenged. You may be the Prime Minister of this country, but in this House I am in charge.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10225435/Boris-Johnson-accused-threatening-revenge-Sir-Lindsay-Hoyle-silenced-Speaker.html
I look forward to her resignation speech, and her acceptance that any mess is of her own making.
PS-the current Director-General, Paul Lincoln, was appointed by the Govt. Previous experience of Immigration/Customs? 0. Same for his predecessor. Farce.
They seem to be getting increasingly bogged down on a daily basis.
I am in favour of our country taking our fair share of migrants, but there has to be some control.
Pushing back migrants boats is apparently against maritime law, and would probably result in loss of life, therefore not the answer.
The problem is clearly that to complete an asylum application you have to be in the UK.
If this was not the case, then the people traffickers are out of business.
The EU has similar problems.
The rule is that they must apply for asylum in the first safe country that they arrive in.
If this was amended to allow them to apply for asylum in any country of their choice, but from the first safe country.
Failure to do so would mean they would be returned.
Applications from those arriving illegally shouldnt be considered.
We would then have to deal with the applications in a timely fashion.
The Liverpool bomber apparently completed an asylum application in 2015.
Another resignation from the Home Secretary would be most welcome.
Contrary to the Far Right mantra, we are not taking on our fair share in relation to migrants. On 2 separate matters.
Firstly, in relation to people fleeing for their lives. Let's take Syria, for starters. The figures are shameful. Many of the major refugee camps are in neighbouring countries. That we are steadfastly ignoring. Turkey 3.5 million, Lebanon (which has the population of Scotland normally) 944,000, Jordan 676,000, Iraq 253,000.
But most of the richest nations are providing neither financial help, or resettlement. There are exceptions-Germany 532,000, the relatively small Austria 49,000, Netherlands 32,000. Us? Less than 13,000. For victims of a war that, lest we forget, the UK has been supplying weapons to both sides in Syria and, at differing times, supporting both sides.
Then look at economic migrants. Let's leave to 1 side whether we should accept these people or not (personally, I would like to see a proper points-based system, whereby we take economic migrants that make economic sense for the UK). Trying to blame France for this is ludicrous. It is our actions that are lining the pockets of the gangmasters.
Imagine the roles were reversed. Thousands of people landed in the UK. French speakers, with family ties in France. Who wanted to apply for asylum in France. Do you think we would be saying-"it's OK France. We'll pay. It's our problem"? We have taken back control of our borders. So-man up, and deal with a border problem. Send some of our Border Force to France (which, incidentally, we have been doing since way before we joined the EU), or pay the French to deal with our problem.
The EU are no better. Why is there no co-ordinated relief effort? Why dump problems on Lebanon? Or Belarus?
Its a huge f..k up, that we have all created.
They all arrive in a small number of countries.
The current rules are unfair to them, and dont work anyway.
These countries are probably happy when thousands of the asylum seekers/migrants escape and wander through Europe to apply for asylum elsewhere.
Why wouldnt they be?
The people traffickers are only in business because the current rules dont work.
They couldnt survive if we put in place a set of rules that actually worked.
It is wrong that anyone should benefit from breaking the rules.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/we-all-must-go-to-peppa-pig-world-says-uk-pm-johnson-in-speech-flap/ar-AAQZvg1?ocid=msedgntp