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.
Get a grip, Boris: Senior Tories demand PM raises his game after 19 MPs rebel on social care reforms and shambolic Peppa Pig speech to CBI. And now even Brexit chief is weighing in on tax cuts
Boris Johnson is gathering his Cabinet after 19 MPs fired a warning shot by voting against watering down the cap on care costs last night, while dozens more abstained. The government's plan still went through due to its huge 77-strong majority - but alarm bells are sounding in Downing Street after the margin was slashed to just 26. The blow came after Mr Johnson put on a chaotic performance at the CBI conference, with the hall left in awkward silence for more than 20 seconds after he lost his thread. One Government source swiped that Mr Johnson, still suffering a heavy cold, seemed to have had 'a bit too much Lemsip'. Even Downing Street insiders reportedly laid into the premier, with one telling the Times there had been 'stumble after stumble' and 'people are sharpening their knives'. Mr Johnson came under fire on another front last night when a Cabinet minister publicly joined a push for taxes to be cut.
Something that has been kicked down the road for at least 30 years, as successive Governments have ignored doing anything. Because every possible solution might be good for the country, but will invariably get a bad press, whatever solution is proposed. While the problem gets steadily worse.
Do I agree with the proposals? No. But at least he is trying to find a solution.
Because this is one occasion when doing nothing is worse than almost every solution.
Something that has been kicked down the road for at least 30 years, as successive Governments have ignored doing anything. Because every possible solution might be good for the country, but will invariably get a bad press, whatever solution is proposed. While the problem gets steadily worse.
Do I agree with the proposals? No. But at least he is trying to find a solution.
Because this is one occasion when doing nothing is worse than almost every solution.
He claimed to have an oven ready plan. Not true. The plan keeps changing. He also claimed that nobody would have to sell their home to pay for social care. Also not true. Would a wife have to sell her home to pay for husbands social care? If the house was worth say 100k, where would she live, and wouldnt her benefit entitlement make it completely pointless.
n 24 July 2019, Boris Johnson – then the new prime minister – stood on the steps of 10 Downing Street and promised he had a plan for social care: “I am announcing […] that we will fix the crisis in social care once and for all, with a clear plan we have prepared,” he said, “to give every older person the dignity and security they deserve”.
There we had it. The plan was prepared. But it was, apparently, not fit for public or parliamentary viewing. And still isn’t. Fast forward to May 2021 and we still await the “clear plan” the prime minister promised.
Boris Johnson accused of social care 'con' after MPs rubber stamp funding plan The plan will see poorer pensioners paying more for care.
Shadow health minister Justin Madders, speaking in the debate, said: "We always thought levelling up was just a slogan with little substance to it, but now we know its actually worse than that, it is in fact a con trick, a lie, that will leave many of those who it was meant to be supporting worse off.
"There is no plan to fix social care, this Bill won’t stop people having to sell their homes, and the only people it will help are those already comfortably well off."
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.
Letters of no confidence in Boris Johnson have been submitted, claim Tory MPs
Tories admit care cap impact on poor pensioners will only be published NEXT YEAR
Details of how a £900m-a-year care shake-up will hit poor pensioners will only be published NEXT YEAR, the Tory Health Secretary has admitted.
Sajid Javid said it is still months before he will reveal any estimate of how many poorer and northern care residents could be forced to sell their homes.
2 quick points in relation to recent comments on this thread.
1. Geoffrey Cox MP is not "taking the mick". He is continuing to choose to (legally) profit from a flawed system, which this Government/the House of Commons is failing to correct. There are easy solutions to this:-
(1) Parliament could actually pass a Law stopping people earning outrageous sums while they sort out the more difficult questions; or
(2) The Conservative Party/PM could show some backbone, and tell this MP that, if he continues down this road, they will withdraw the Whip, and expel him from the Party. I am amazed this has not happened-compare and contrast with treatment of Ken Clarke, Amber Rudd etc
2. The Conservative Party is not run by fools. Although some clearly believe the electorate are. Boris Johnson has many strengths. But the ability to plan for the longer term? Ability to be precise in relation to anything other than the airy-fairy big picture? Never. Johnson is looking for a way out. Where he cements his legacy for "getting Brexit done" and "his" vaccine. And leave other people to deal with the fallout/take the blame. Why? Because that is what he has done his whole career(s).
2 quick points in relation to recent comments on this thread.
1. Geoffrey Cox MP is not "taking the mick". He is continuing to choose to (legally) profit from a flawed system, which this Government/the House of Commons is failing to correct. There are easy solutions to this:-
(1) Parliament could actually pass a Law stopping people earning outrageous sums while they sort out the more difficult questions; or
(2) The Conservative Party/PM could show some backbone, and tell this MP that, if he continues down this road, they will withdraw the Whip, and expel him from the Party. I am amazed this has not happened-compare and contrast with treatment of Ken Clarke, Amber Rudd etc
2. The Conservative Party is not run by fools. Although some clearly believe the electorate are. Boris Johnson has many strengths. But the ability to plan for the longer term? Ability to be precise in relation to anything other than the airy-fairy big picture? Never. Johnson is looking for a way out. Where he cements his legacy for "getting Brexit done" and "his" vaccine. And leave other people to deal with the fallout/take the blame. Why? Because that is what he has done his whole career(s).
As I said earlier, I am sure that Geoffrey Cox will have acted within the rules, but his behaviour is morally incorrect. He doesnt need to claim £1900 per month for his rent. He shouldnt be allowed to ignore his parliamentary obligations. I would agree that the rules should have been changed long ago.
On the migrants what happened yesterday was a tragedy. Although a predictable one.
We have apparently sent a total of 5 back this year.
Apparently The Dublin Agreement no longer applies after we have left the EU. No agreement has been made to take its place, despite 6 years of negotiation since the referendum.
We currently average 8-10 years to process an asylum application, including appeals. The applicants have to live on around a fiver per day, and arent allowed to work. Germany takes an average of 6 months.
France CANCELS meeting with Priti Patel in wake of deaths of 27 migrants because of 'unacceptable' letter from Boris Johnson listing five key demands to end tragedies in Channel
Home Secretary Priti Patel said there is 'no quick fix' to tackle migrants crossing the Channel in small boats as France demanded fresh assistance French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin has cancelled a Sunday meeting with his UK counterpart Priti Patel following criticism by Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
France CANCELS meeting with Priti Patel in wake of deaths of 27 migrants because of 'unacceptable' letter from Boris Johnson listing five key demands to end tragedies in Channel
Home Secretary Priti Patel said there is 'no quick fix' to tackle migrants crossing the Channel in small boats as France demanded fresh assistance French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin has cancelled a Sunday meeting with his UK counterpart Priti Patel following criticism by Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
France CANCELS meeting with Priti Patel in wake of deaths of 27 migrants because of 'unacceptable' letter from Boris Johnson listing five key demands to end tragedies in Channel
Home Secretary Priti Patel said there is 'no quick fix' to tackle migrants crossing the Channel in small boats as France demanded fresh assistance French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin has cancelled a Sunday meeting with his UK counterpart Priti Patel following criticism by Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
2 countries determined to put politics above lives. Shame on us both.
I agree it is a shame. Although I cant help thinking that talks were scheduled to take place until Boris published the letter he sent Macron. Boris just hasnt got a clue. You have to assume that had he not published the letter, that talks would be still going ahead. Some of the solutions put forward dont seem realistic. If the situation was reversed, and the French proposed posting their police, or military, with powers of arrest on our shores, Boris would be the first to scream about Sovereignty. I am not sure that policing such a large coastline can put a stop to the crossings. The French Police have been ridiculed in the British press for standing by while the migrants launch their boats. Yet there were 2 police officers, and 40 asylum seekers, determined to cross the channel. What did they expect them to do? If you were an asylum seeker that may have parted with your life savings to get a place on a boat, you are unlikely to be discouraged very easily.
I think that the way to discourage them is to not allow anyone to apply for asylum if they have arrived illegally. Allow applications from people that arent in the UK. Crossing the channel would then be pointless. Currently the opposite is true, you have to arrive illegally to apply for asylum. This is the problem that has to be addressed.
If we could also speed up the application procedure in line with Germany, we wouldnt be putting them up in hotels and costing the British taxpayer a fortune. If channel crossings became pointless there would be no further loss of life.
We should reach an agreement with the French that any illegal arrivals from France will be dropped back there. If we did this, it wouldnt take very long before the people traffickers were put out of business.
France CANCELS meeting with Priti Patel in wake of deaths of 27 migrants because of 'unacceptable' letter from Boris Johnson listing five key demands to end tragedies in Channel
Home Secretary Priti Patel said there is 'no quick fix' to tackle migrants crossing the Channel in small boats as France demanded fresh assistance French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin has cancelled a Sunday meeting with his UK counterpart Priti Patel following criticism by Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
2 countries determined to put politics above lives. Shame on us both.
I agree it is a shame. Although I cant help thinking that talks were scheduled to take place until Boris published the letter he sent Macron. Boris just hasnt got a clue. You have to assume that had he not published the letter, that talks would be still going ahead. Some of the solutions put forward dont seem realistic. If the situation was reversed, and the French proposed posting their police, or military, with powers of arrest on our shores, Boris would be the first to scream about Sovereignty. I am not sure that policing such a large coastline can put a stop to the crossings. The French Police have been ridiculed in the British press for standing by while the migrants launch their boats. Yet there were 2 police officers, and 40 asylum seekers, determined to cross the channel. What did they expect them to do? If you were an asylum seeker that may have parted with your life savings to get a place on a boat, you are unlikely to be discouraged very easily.
I think that the way to discourage them is to not allow anyone to apply for asylum if they have arrived illegally. Allow applications from people that arent in the UK. Crossing the channel would then be pointless. Currently the opposite is true, you have to arrive illegally to apply for asylum. This is the problem that has to be addressed.
If we could also speed up the application procedure in line with Germany, we wouldnt be putting them up in hotels and costing the British taxpayer a fortune. If channel crossings became pointless there would be no further loss of life.
We should reach an agreement with the French that any illegal arrivals from France will be dropped back there. If we did this, it wouldnt take very long before the people traffickers were put out of business.
I wholeheartedly agree with pretty much all of that.
The only thing I would add is this.
If the UK and France could concentrate on the problem, instead of playing Billy Big B0ll0cks, this could be resolved in days. for example:-
1. UK to send people to France to process UK asylum-seekers; or 2. UK to help fund France doing this on our behalf, France to forward arguable cases to the UK OR deal with agreed perameters
France to choose. In return, any boat migrants via France to be agreed to be returned.
How difficult is that?
The Head of UK Border Force has zero previous experience in Customs or Immigration. But he is/was a career Diplomat. If he can't spot a Diplomatic solution, exactly why has he got the job?
Comments
https://video.dailymail.co.uk/preview/mol/2021/11/23/8992593883582018347/308x174_MP4_8992593883582018347.mp4
Boris Johnson is gathering his Cabinet after 19 MPs fired a warning shot by voting against watering down the cap on care costs last night, while dozens more abstained. The government's plan still went through due to its huge 77-strong majority - but alarm bells are sounding in Downing Street after the margin was slashed to just 26. The blow came after Mr Johnson put on a chaotic performance at the CBI conference, with the hall left in awkward silence for more than 20 seconds after he lost his thread. One Government source swiped that Mr Johnson, still suffering a heavy cold, seemed to have had 'a bit too much Lemsip'. Even Downing Street insiders reportedly laid into the premier, with one telling the Times there had been 'stumble after stumble' and 'people are sharpening their knives'. Mr Johnson came under fire on another front last night when a Cabinet minister publicly joined a push for taxes to be cut.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10233283/Tories-demand-PM-raises-game-social-care-revolt-CBI-shambles.html
Something that has been kicked down the road for at least 30 years, as successive Governments have ignored doing anything. Because every possible solution might be good for the country, but will invariably get a bad press, whatever solution is proposed. While the problem gets steadily worse.
Do I agree with the proposals? No. But at least he is trying to find a solution.
Because this is one occasion when doing nothing is worse than almost every solution.
Not true.
The plan keeps changing.
He also claimed that nobody would have to sell their home to pay for social care.
Also not true.
Would a wife have to sell her home to pay for husbands social care?
If the house was worth say 100k, where would she live, and wouldnt her benefit entitlement make it completely pointless.
n 24 July 2019, Boris Johnson – then the new prime minister – stood on the steps of 10 Downing Street and promised he had a plan for social care: “I am announcing […] that we will fix the crisis in social care once and for all, with a clear plan we have prepared,” he said, “to give every older person the dignity and security they deserve”.
There we had it. The plan was prepared. But it was, apparently, not fit for public or parliamentary viewing. And still isn’t. Fast forward to May 2021 and we still await the “clear plan” the prime minister promised.
https://www.wandptraining.co.uk/heath-social-care-news/a-plan-for-social-care/
Boris Johnson accused of social care 'con' after MPs rubber stamp funding plan
The plan will see poorer pensioners paying more for care.
Shadow health minister Justin Madders, speaking in the debate, said: "We always thought levelling up was just a slogan with little substance to it, but now we know its actually worse than that, it is in fact a con trick, a lie, that will leave many of those who it was meant to be supporting worse off.
"There is no plan to fix social care, this Bill won’t stop people having to sell their homes, and the only people it will help are those already comfortably well off."
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/uk-news/boris-johnson-accused-social-care-22240996
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/letters-of-no-confidence-in-boris-johnson-have-been-submitted-claim-tory-mps/ar-AAR3v8O?ocid=msedgntp
Wait a second Peppa - Sooty's trying to say something'
Details of how a £900m-a-year care shake-up will hit poor pensioners will only be published NEXT YEAR, the Tory Health Secretary has admitted.
Sajid Javid said it is still months before he will reveal any estimate of how many poorer and northern care residents could be forced to sell their homes.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/tories-admit-care-cap-impact-on-poor-pensioners-will-only-be-published-next-year/ar-AAR2EsH?ocid=msedgntp
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/businesses-and-tory-donors-attack-high-tax-economy-after-pms-shambolic-speech/ar-AAR4528?ocid=msedgntp
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/fury-as-geoffrey-cox-takes-the-mick-by-resuming-second-job-while-commons-sits/ar-AAR5OiW?ocid=msedgntp
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/boris-johnson-warned-of-threat-of-leadership-challenge-in-new-year/ar-AAR5Xpz?ocid=msedgntp
1. Geoffrey Cox MP is not "taking the mick". He is continuing to choose to (legally) profit from a flawed system, which this Government/the House of Commons is failing to correct. There are easy solutions to this:-
(1) Parliament could actually pass a Law stopping people earning outrageous sums while they sort out the more difficult questions; or
(2) The Conservative Party/PM could show some backbone, and tell this MP that, if he continues down this road, they will withdraw the Whip, and expel him from the Party. I am amazed this has not happened-compare and contrast with treatment of Ken Clarke, Amber Rudd etc
2. The Conservative Party is not run by fools. Although some clearly believe the electorate are. Boris Johnson has many strengths. But the ability to plan for the longer term? Ability to be precise in relation to anything other than the airy-fairy big picture? Never. Johnson is looking for a way out. Where he cements his legacy for "getting Brexit done" and "his" vaccine. And leave other people to deal with the fallout/take the blame. Why? Because that is what he has done his whole career(s).
He doesnt need to claim £1900 per month for his rent.
He shouldnt be allowed to ignore his parliamentary obligations.
I would agree that the rules should have been changed long ago.
On the migrants what happened yesterday was a tragedy.
Although a predictable one.
We have apparently sent a total of 5 back this year.
Apparently The Dublin Agreement no longer applies after we have left the EU.
No agreement has been made to take its place, despite 6 years of negotiation since the referendum.
We currently average 8-10 years to process an asylum application, including appeals.
The applicants have to live on around a fiver per day, and arent allowed to work.
Germany takes an average of 6 months.
Ridiculous.
Home Secretary Priti Patel said there is 'no quick fix' to tackle migrants crossing the Channel in small boats as France demanded fresh assistance
French Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin has cancelled a Sunday meeting with his UK counterpart Priti Patel following criticism by Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10245249/France-CANCELS-meeting-Priti-Patel-wake-deaths-27-migrants.html
Shame on us both.
Although I cant help thinking that talks were scheduled to take place until Boris published the letter he sent Macron.
Boris just hasnt got a clue.
You have to assume that had he not published the letter, that talks would be still going ahead.
Some of the solutions put forward dont seem realistic.
If the situation was reversed, and the French proposed posting their police, or military, with powers of arrest on our shores, Boris would be the first to scream about Sovereignty.
I am not sure that policing such a large coastline can put a stop to the crossings.
The French Police have been ridiculed in the British press for standing by while the migrants launch their boats.
Yet there were 2 police officers, and 40 asylum seekers, determined to cross the channel.
What did they expect them to do?
If you were an asylum seeker that may have parted with your life savings to get a place on a boat, you are unlikely to be discouraged very easily.
I think that the way to discourage them is to not allow anyone to apply for asylum if they have arrived illegally.
Allow applications from people that arent in the UK.
Crossing the channel would then be pointless.
Currently the opposite is true, you have to arrive illegally to apply for asylum.
This is the problem that has to be addressed.
If we could also speed up the application procedure in line with Germany, we wouldnt be putting them up in hotels and costing the British taxpayer a fortune.
If channel crossings became pointless there would be no further loss of life.
We should reach an agreement with the French that any illegal arrivals from France will be dropped back there.
If we did this, it wouldnt take very long before the people traffickers were put out of business.
The only thing I would add is this.
If the UK and France could concentrate on the problem, instead of playing Billy Big B0ll0cks, this could be resolved in days. for example:-
1. UK to send people to France to process UK asylum-seekers; or
2. UK to help fund France doing this on our behalf, France to forward arguable cases to the UK OR deal with agreed perameters
France to choose. In return, any boat migrants via France to be agreed to be returned.
How difficult is that?
The Head of UK Border Force has zero previous experience in Customs or Immigration. But he is/was a career Diplomat. If he can't spot a Diplomatic solution, exactly why has he got the job?