Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
Parliamentary Sleaze 10:38 - Nov 8 with 3207 viewsSadoldgit

Whilst I don’t have a problem with lobbying per se (there are clearly benefits in many cases) I do draw the line at MPs on corporation payrolls or taking money to ask questions in the House or to forward a particular company’s interest. The rules do need to be changed and we need much more transparency about what is going on. MPs are public servants and get paid a good wage for doing their jobs. They should not be making money on the side thanks to their privileged position and be in someone’s pocket. Yes, it has gone on forever but we have seen more and more of it and now is the time for it to stop.
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 11:57 - Nov 8 with 1862 viewsBazza

I agree totally. I also think that ideally MPs should not have other jobs although that might discourage successful individuals on 6 figure salaries from becoming MPs
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 15:01 - Nov 8 with 1809 viewsSadoldgit

I don’t know where they get the time to do other jobs as well, you would think that they would be too busy! If they need more money than an MPs salary then perhaps they should be doing something else.
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 18:38 - Nov 8 with 1773 viewsSadoldgit

Johnson has ducked out of the Parliamentary debate tonight. No surprise there.
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 19:53 - Nov 8 with 1752 viewskernow

Do we really need parliament?
Divine right of kings said king Charles.
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 23:53 - Nov 8 with 1691 viewskingolaf

I quite like Boris.

However, on this issue he can’t be defended.

His mate got caught out and rather than him face the music, they tried to change the rules.

It’s an absolute affront to democracy. Putin would be proud of that one.

Boris will do well to last another year. Knives are definitely coming out for him from inside the Tory party.
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 23:56 - Nov 8 with 1689 viewsGennaro_Contaldo

Parliamentary Sleaze on 23:53 - Nov 8 by kingolaf

I quite like Boris.

However, on this issue he can’t be defended.

His mate got caught out and rather than him face the music, they tried to change the rules.

It’s an absolute affront to democracy. Putin would be proud of that one.

Boris will do well to last another year. Knives are definitely coming out for him from inside the Tory party.


Absolutely this. It was stupid to do what he did, BUT, it really does appear the decent from within his own party is growing - you can tell as it's all over the bloody news.

All the sh*t that is happening around the world and with climate change and there is SO MUCH focus on this, it is not balanced and smacks of his party pushing for a change.

The UI; For the sophisticated gentleman
Poll: Where will Saints finish in the 2018/19 season

0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 09:28 - Nov 9 with 1622 viewsSadoldgit

Parliamentary Sleaze on 23:53 - Nov 8 by kingolaf

I quite like Boris.

However, on this issue he can’t be defended.

His mate got caught out and rather than him face the music, they tried to change the rules.

It’s an absolute affront to democracy. Putin would be proud of that one.

Boris will do well to last another year. Knives are definitely coming out for him from inside the Tory party.


The problem is that this isn’t the first time. It is one more disgrace in a long series of disgraceful behaviour. Even the Express and Mail are turning on him now. The bloke has been taking the piss for years, perhaps now people will finally see him for what he is and kick him out of a job he should never have had.
Geoffrey Cox earns £1m in another job and thinks it is ok to run his constituency from the West Indies. Perfectly ok as it is on the rules says Raab. It is not perfectly ok and it is time that the rules were changed so that the people we vote for work for us full time and are not in the pocket of those looking to influence Parliament.
Johnson didn’t even have the decency or the balls to turn up and face the music last night which shows yet again his arrogance and disdain for the people who voted his party in. The only difference between him and Trump is the fake tan.
The only good thing about this latest round of embarrassing headlines is that it might herald the end of Johnson’s time in office.
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 09:46 - Nov 9 with 1614 viewsBazza

Parliamentary Sleaze on 09:28 - Nov 9 by Sadoldgit

The problem is that this isn’t the first time. It is one more disgrace in a long series of disgraceful behaviour. Even the Express and Mail are turning on him now. The bloke has been taking the piss for years, perhaps now people will finally see him for what he is and kick him out of a job he should never have had.
Geoffrey Cox earns £1m in another job and thinks it is ok to run his constituency from the West Indies. Perfectly ok as it is on the rules says Raab. It is not perfectly ok and it is time that the rules were changed so that the people we vote for work for us full time and are not in the pocket of those looking to influence Parliament.
Johnson didn’t even have the decency or the balls to turn up and face the music last night which shows yet again his arrogance and disdain for the people who voted his party in. The only difference between him and Trump is the fake tan.
The only good thing about this latest round of embarrassing headlines is that it might herald the end of Johnson’s time in office.


Unusually perhaps, I agree with all you've written until you paired him with Trump.
Especially now the American Republicans are talking about bringing him back when sleepy Joe fades away and his vice-pres. lady messes up. No return for Boris if he gets ousted.
0
Login to get fewer ads

Parliamentary Sleaze on 10:21 - Nov 9 with 1587 viewsSadoldgit

Parliamentary Sleaze on 09:46 - Nov 9 by Bazza

Unusually perhaps, I agree with all you've written until you paired him with Trump.
Especially now the American Republicans are talking about bringing him back when sleepy Joe fades away and his vice-pres. lady messes up. No return for Boris if he gets ousted.


I’m hoping that the American electorate will be enjoying the lack of madness and drama under a non Trump President and that will be enough to keep him out if he stands again. Biden may not be the best American President ever, but Trump is probably the worst.
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 10:33 - Nov 9 with 1579 viewsdirk_doone

Parliamentary Sleaze on 15:01 - Nov 8 by Sadoldgit

I don’t know where they get the time to do other jobs as well, you would think that they would be too busy! If they need more money than an MPs salary then perhaps they should be doing something else.


"Too busy"? The House of Commons is nearly empty most of the time. Very few of them bother to turn up for work unless they are forced to by their party whips for a key vote.

Per capita, we must have the most top heavy, expensive government in the world and that's before you even start to count the House of Lords, and in terms of any actual work, they are probably also one of the least productive, which is why almost everything they are responsible for nowadays is a shambles.
[Post edited 9 Nov 2021 10:43]

Poll: Who will win the Premier League this season?

0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 10:48 - Nov 9 with 1560 viewssaint901

We perhaps have to ask ourselves if we want those elected to Parliament to be full time professional politicians with little or no experience of life, jobs, society (other than from a uni degree in PPE) or do we want people who understand something of the real world and how their decisions impact that?

I have dealt face to face with many MPs and in general have found that those with a career pre politics, or business/consulting interests whilst an MP, to be more sympathetic to the issues I brought them. Those I would class as professional politicians tend to be all about themselves, the party, their career post politics and the country - in that order.

Personally I would reform things as follows.

1. Budget to pay each MP perhaps twice what they presently get
2. Limit any outside consultancy salaries to no more than £10k and no more than 2 of those. (I'd tax anything over that at 100%).
3. Add additional funding for Ministers but limit that to no more than say 30 salaries.
4. Pay the above budget to the appropriate Party and they can divide it as they see fit. That to include expenses.

Presently the whole system is opaque and it's only when disgraceful incidents like those recently hit the headlines that the majority of the population takes notice. More transparency will not stop 90% of the voting population take more notice, but it will perhaps end the more egregious examples.

Expecting power mad egomaniacs who think that they deserve adulation, approval, reward in line with their inflated view of themselves to submit to rules made by "lesser" people is hopeless. Put the economic side of that equation into the hands of people of the same ilk however - step back and watch the fireworks.
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 11:11 - Nov 9 with 1548 viewsSadoldgit

I don’t think the basic MPs are paid poorly for what they do. They receive plenty of benefits too. They also don’t become MPs straight from school. They all start off in “normal” jobs and become MPs after gaining life experiences. You would hope that people wouldn’t vote for inexperienced candidates. Their job is to represent us which means listening to our needs and representing those in Parliament. You don’t need to have been a nurse to understand that they are poorly paid and understaffed. The main skill set would seem to be to listen, understand the issues,make informed judgements and represent those within Parliament snd the constituency.
Like footballers, they won’t always make a living from it but that comes with the territory and they will know that they could end up having to find another job if they are voted out. More reason to do a good job for your constituency.
I think we would be better served by people who do the job because they care, not because they can earn a lot of money from it.
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 11:15 - Nov 9 with 1546 viewsSadoldgit

Parliamentary Sleaze on 10:33 - Nov 9 by dirk_doone

"Too busy"? The House of Commons is nearly empty most of the time. Very few of them bother to turn up for work unless they are forced to by their party whips for a key vote.

Per capita, we must have the most top heavy, expensive government in the world and that's before you even start to count the House of Lords, and in terms of any actual work, they are probably also one of the least productive, which is why almost everything they are responsible for nowadays is a shambles.
[Post edited 9 Nov 2021 10:43]


apart from their own constitutional duties don’t many of them sit on various committees etc? My two local MPs are always on the TV talking about local issues.
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 23:05 - Nov 9 with 1477 viewsSadoldgit

More here

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2021/nov/09/iain-duncan-smith-accused-of-br
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 08:22 - Nov 10 with 1409 viewsSalisburySaint

Parliamentary Sleaze on 23:05 - Nov 9 by Sadoldgit

More here

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2021/nov/09/iain-duncan-smith-accused-of-br


Crazy

I work in local government, currently dealing with a contract award.

Every time I deal with contract awards, I have to confirm that I have no conflict of interest, seems they don't have similar rules for MP's or if so they are being ignored
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 09:16 - Nov 10 with 1379 viewsSadoldgit

Parliamentary Sleaze on 08:22 - Nov 10 by SalisburySaint

Crazy

I work in local government, currently dealing with a contract award.

Every time I deal with contract awards, I have to confirm that I have no conflict of interest, seems they don't have similar rules for MP's or if so they are being ignored


Agreed. When buying office equipment we had to use approved suppliers and even when we managed to source materials locally and cheaper were bound by strict rules, inevitably ending in us payment more through government approved sources. I used to employ lawyers from Chambers each day and had to demonstrate that I used a range of Chambers, not just favouring a few. I wasn’t allowed to attend a Christmas bash from our local Chambers because it might have been construed as an attempt to get more work from us.
It appears now that Cox has been using his Parliamentary office for his own private work, something that is strictly against the rules. Raab has swerved it as best he can but his lack of support for Cox shows that he may well be thrown to the wolves to get the rest of them off the hook with a seat in the Lords as a sweetener.
It stinks but has been going on for years. Perhaps now is the time for a complete overhaul of Parliamentary procedures?
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 10:23 - Nov 10 with 1361 viewsdirk_doone

Parliamentary Sleaze on 11:15 - Nov 9 by Sadoldgit

apart from their own constitutional duties don’t many of them sit on various committees etc? My two local MPs are always on the TV talking about local issues.


In the Virgin Islands?

I think everybody knows we have a corrupt, dishonest government but very few people care. As long as they look good on TV and get the backing from the newspapers at election time, they'll still be popular with the majority of voters. Honesty isn't a particularly important factor in our elections as moral standards in contemporary Britain are not what they used to be. When voters are told they were lied to, they just shrug their shoulders. Nobody expects Boris Johnson to be honest. Being a charming rogue, an Old Etonian Del Boy, just makes him more entertaining and popular with voters.
[Post edited 10 Nov 2021 13:20]

Poll: Who will win the Premier League this season?

0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 11:32 - Nov 10 with 1333 viewsBazza

Parliamentary Sleaze on 10:23 - Nov 10 by dirk_doone

In the Virgin Islands?

I think everybody knows we have a corrupt, dishonest government but very few people care. As long as they look good on TV and get the backing from the newspapers at election time, they'll still be popular with the majority of voters. Honesty isn't a particularly important factor in our elections as moral standards in contemporary Britain are not what they used to be. When voters are told they were lied to, they just shrug their shoulders. Nobody expects Boris Johnson to be honest. Being a charming rogue, an Old Etonian Del Boy, just makes him more entertaining and popular with voters.
[Post edited 10 Nov 2021 13:20]


I'm sure a bigger factor in Boris' election was the extremely poor option of Corbyn for PM
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 12:42 - Nov 10 with 1311 viewsSadoldgit

Parliamentary Sleaze on 10:23 - Nov 10 by dirk_doone

In the Virgin Islands?

I think everybody knows we have a corrupt, dishonest government but very few people care. As long as they look good on TV and get the backing from the newspapers at election time, they'll still be popular with the majority of voters. Honesty isn't a particularly important factor in our elections as moral standards in contemporary Britain are not what they used to be. When voters are told they were lied to, they just shrug their shoulders. Nobody expects Boris Johnson to be honest. Being a charming rogue, an Old Etonian Del Boy, just makes him more entertaining and popular with voters.
[Post edited 10 Nov 2021 13:20]


I’d love to slag off our MP and the one in the neighbouring constituency as they are both Tories (Damiens Green and Collins but they both always seem to be busy doing MP stuff in Kent.
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 12:50 - Nov 10 with 1308 views1885_SFC

Parliamentary Sleaze on 10:48 - Nov 9 by saint901

We perhaps have to ask ourselves if we want those elected to Parliament to be full time professional politicians with little or no experience of life, jobs, society (other than from a uni degree in PPE) or do we want people who understand something of the real world and how their decisions impact that?

I have dealt face to face with many MPs and in general have found that those with a career pre politics, or business/consulting interests whilst an MP, to be more sympathetic to the issues I brought them. Those I would class as professional politicians tend to be all about themselves, the party, their career post politics and the country - in that order.

Personally I would reform things as follows.

1. Budget to pay each MP perhaps twice what they presently get
2. Limit any outside consultancy salaries to no more than £10k and no more than 2 of those. (I'd tax anything over that at 100%).
3. Add additional funding for Ministers but limit that to no more than say 30 salaries.
4. Pay the above budget to the appropriate Party and they can divide it as they see fit. That to include expenses.

Presently the whole system is opaque and it's only when disgraceful incidents like those recently hit the headlines that the majority of the population takes notice. More transparency will not stop 90% of the voting population take more notice, but it will perhaps end the more egregious examples.

Expecting power mad egomaniacs who think that they deserve adulation, approval, reward in line with their inflated view of themselves to submit to rules made by "lesser" people is hopeless. Put the economic side of that equation into the hands of people of the same ilk however - step back and watch the fireworks.


The problem with doubling an MP's salary (to £160,000 for example) is that the job will attract people just for the money & not because they want to really change things/make a difference in their communities like they currently do - or should do.

Old School is Cool

1
Parliamentary Sleaze on 15:24 - Nov 10 with 1277 viewsDorsetIan

The average UK salary seems to be around the £30,000 mark and there's not a lot of scope for living the high life on that sort of money.

For the like of Geoffrey Cox QC, it wouldn't be unusual to earn £30,000 for one case. Barristers, lawyers, accountants, all routinely charge hourly rates in the hundreds if not thousands of pounds.

The capital gains tax relief for 'entrepreneurs' was until quite recently £10m. That meant they paid tax at 10% on gains up this amount. Sunak reduced it to £1m, but that still means that an entrepreneur can pay just £100,000 on £1m profits.

The point I'm making is that there is the world of working people and there there is another world of much bigger sums, and the likes of Cox and Johnson just take those much bigger sums for granted and don't think twice about earning huge fees for second jobs , consultancy gigs or for bashing out a newspaper column.

I don't know what the answer is but it all seems pretty uneven to me.

Poll: Should we try to replace Selles for the final seven games?

0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 16:08 - Nov 10 with 1262 viewsSadoldgit

Parliamentary Sleaze on 12:50 - Nov 10 by 1885_SFC

The problem with doubling an MP's salary (to £160,000 for example) is that the job will attract people just for the money & not because they want to really change things/make a difference in their communities like they currently do - or should do.


I am with you on this 100%. People going into any kind of public service should be doing so because they want to contribute something to the community in which they live or society in general, not to make piles of money. People like Johnson, Blair and Cameron might not earn the same as CEO of large corporations, but they will and can get a fortunate for after dinner speaking, not to mention using their influence to land contracts. If MP’s are focussed on pulling in money from elsewhere, how much time do they give to their MP duties? If they are in the pocket of someone, how does that benefit their constituency/the country if they are using their influence to line their own pockets instead of doing what is best for the rest of us.
Paying them more won’t change a thing for many of them. We need stricter, clearer rules and stricter enforcement of those rules.
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 08:55 - Nov 11 with 1191 viewssaint901

Parliamentary Sleaze on 15:24 - Nov 10 by DorsetIan

The average UK salary seems to be around the £30,000 mark and there's not a lot of scope for living the high life on that sort of money.

For the like of Geoffrey Cox QC, it wouldn't be unusual to earn £30,000 for one case. Barristers, lawyers, accountants, all routinely charge hourly rates in the hundreds if not thousands of pounds.

The capital gains tax relief for 'entrepreneurs' was until quite recently £10m. That meant they paid tax at 10% on gains up this amount. Sunak reduced it to £1m, but that still means that an entrepreneur can pay just £100,000 on £1m profits.

The point I'm making is that there is the world of working people and there there is another world of much bigger sums, and the likes of Cox and Johnson just take those much bigger sums for granted and don't think twice about earning huge fees for second jobs , consultancy gigs or for bashing out a newspaper column.

I don't know what the answer is but it all seems pretty uneven to me.


This is very much in my day job territory and because I'm a pedant who can't bear to see inaccuracy going uncorrected, I will do that.

Nothing below alters the point you make which I entirely agree with.

First, QC's usually have two charge rates. One for case prep and one for appearing in Court. Case prep would regularly be £1k to £1.5k an hour. Court could be £5k to £8k a day. This is why people like me prepare cases carefully and do as much of the heavy lifting as we can at our rates which even at the top end don't go over £350 and hour.

A complicated case could easily earn a QC deep into six figures.

Second, Entrepreneurs Relief. You are correct that it has a £1m limit (from March 2020) and that GAINS up to that limit are taxed at 10%. It is however for GAINS, i.e. sales of business assets. It does not apply to INCOME or PROFITS (QC's are all self employed). So if he earned £1m he would pay £436k in tax and north of £25k in NIC.

Please don't mix gains from sales of a business or assets and income from ongoing activity.

Sorry - as you were.
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 08:56 - Nov 11 with 1189 viewssaint901

Parliamentary Sleaze on 12:50 - Nov 10 by 1885_SFC

The problem with doubling an MP's salary (to £160,000 for example) is that the job will attract people just for the money & not because they want to really change things/make a difference in their communities like they currently do - or should do.


Equally if they have a well paid job but run the risk of losing it to the next vote would they not take care to get it right?
0
Parliamentary Sleaze on 11:07 - Nov 11 with 1156 viewsDorsetIan

Parliamentary Sleaze on 08:55 - Nov 11 by saint901

This is very much in my day job territory and because I'm a pedant who can't bear to see inaccuracy going uncorrected, I will do that.

Nothing below alters the point you make which I entirely agree with.

First, QC's usually have two charge rates. One for case prep and one for appearing in Court. Case prep would regularly be £1k to £1.5k an hour. Court could be £5k to £8k a day. This is why people like me prepare cases carefully and do as much of the heavy lifting as we can at our rates which even at the top end don't go over £350 and hour.

A complicated case could easily earn a QC deep into six figures.

Second, Entrepreneurs Relief. You are correct that it has a £1m limit (from March 2020) and that GAINS up to that limit are taxed at 10%. It is however for GAINS, i.e. sales of business assets. It does not apply to INCOME or PROFITS (QC's are all self employed). So if he earned £1m he would pay £436k in tax and north of £25k in NIC.

Please don't mix gains from sales of a business or assets and income from ongoing activity.

Sorry - as you were.


Point taken. I did realise I was being loose with the word 'profits' when I wrote, although I wasn't intending to mislead.

You are right, of course, capital gains tax applies only to capital 'profits' and not the income profits.

But the point remains the same. Someone sells a business and makes £1m in profit on the sale, then then pay at only 10%, £100,000, taking away £900,000 net.

And it would take the average worker 30 years at £30,000 a year to earn £900,000 - and that would be their gross figure!

The hourly rates thing is also illustrative. Minimum wage, £9.50 from next year. Most tradespeople I used are charging in the region of £25-£40 /hour. And then it multiples by up to nearly ten for the max case prep rate (£350) that you mention, and as you say the QC is 100x or 150x the minimum wage.

Something is not quite right with all this. And I think it partly explains why ministers who live in this 'silly money' world, could spunk away quite so much on e.g. test and trace, huge consultancy rates and fees to 'introducers'.

Poll: Should we try to replace Selles for the final seven games?

0
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© FansNetwork 2024