Should MPs be required to hold down a job prior to standing for election?

by tlttf Fri Jul 20, 2012 4:17 pm

ED MILIBAND LEADS LIST OF 90 MPS WHO'VE NEVER HAD A 'REAL' JOB

There’s a gulf between politicians and the people, the government and the governed

Former independent MP Martin Bell
20th July 2012
By Daily Star Reporter

LABOUR leader Ed Miliband is one of 90 MPs who has never had a job in the “real world”.

A whopping one in seven members have worked only in politics while others, including Deputy PM Nick Clegg, have done only brief stints as lobbyists or PRs.

And Labour, heavily backed by trade unions, has twice as many MPs who have never worked outside politics as the Tories or Lib Dems.

Former independent MP Martin Bell said the shock figures, in study by the House of Commons Library, were ‘‘a very dangerous development’’.

He added: “There’s a gulf between politicians and the people, the government and the governed.”

by oftenwrong Fri Jul 20, 2012 5:13 pm

Anyone who stands for office is regarded as fair game by the media, which can be a very bruising experience for the unprepared.

Successful people who might otherwise have been effective contributors are very often reluctant to surrender their lives to the public gaze, so their knowledge and experience is denied to the House of Commons. The gap is being filled by professional Parliamentarians. Unsurprisingly.

People tend to get the Government they deserve.

by **Ivan** Fri Jul 20, 2012 8:24 pm

ED MILIBAND LEADS LIST OF 90 MPS WHO'VE NEVER HAD A 'REAL' JOB

I would have said that George Osborne, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, "leads" the list. That incompetent fool has only ever helped in his daddy's wallpaper shop (Osborne and Little), folded towels in Selfridge's for a very brief period, and been a backroom stooge in Tory Central Office. The only reason the crackhead has now been given the job of ruining the economy is because he was Cameron's mate at the Bullingdon Club. All very much in stark contrast to Ed Balls, who has lectured on Economics at Harvard University and been a newspaper columnist on the subject.

by Redflag Sat Jul 21, 2012 5:08 pm

Ivan wrote:
ED MILIBAND LEADS LIST OF 90 MPS WHO'VE NEVER HAD A 'REAL' JOB
I would have said that George Osborne, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, "leads" the list. That incompetent fool has only ever helped in his daddy's wallpaper shop (Osborne and Little), folded towels in Selfridge's for a very brief period, and been a backroom stooge in Tory Central Office. The only reason the crackhead has now been given the job of ruining the economy is because he was Cameron's mate at the Bullingdon Club. All very much in stark contrast to Ed Balls, who has lectured on Economics at Harvard University and been a newspaper columnist on the subject.

Osbourn is nothing but a mealy mouthed Ass Hole, who thinks that doing a good days work is only for the phelbs, that is why part-time chancellor has stuck to him even Negel Lawson (former Thatcher chancellor) thinks he is not doing his job properly. How long before Scam..er..on moves him on ??.

by oftenwrong Sat Jul 21, 2012 10:47 pm

There must be a weakness in the Parliamentary custom of appointing Ministers at the discretion of the Prime Minister (and nobody else).

Where's the sense of moving cabinet members around like pieces on a Chess Board? Just as they settle into a job, they're moved to a completely different one. No wonder they take refuge in waffle when asked a question.

by Bunnyrunner Sat Jul 28, 2012 4:48 am

I have no quarrel with the notion of a "professional" politician, so long as it's their ONLY job. No member of parliament should have a second paid job, done alongside their MP's duties.

by Mel Sat Jul 28, 2012 8:05 am

Hello Bunny and a warm welcome to the forum.

by Bunnyrunner Sat Jul 28, 2012 10:53 am

Mel wrote:Hello Bunny and a warm welcome to the forum.

Thank you.

by Blamhappy Sun Jul 29, 2012 6:58 pm

Hello from me as well.

Yes, I think perhaps politicians would benefit from having "real life" experience before being MPs. However, being an MP itself is surely a job?

by Bunnyrunner Sun Jul 29, 2012 9:05 pm

Blamhappy wrote:Hello from me as well.

Yes, I think perhaps politicians would benefit from having "real life" experience before being MPs. However, being an MP itself is surely a job?

In essence, they do. The experience of coming through the party ranks equips them for service as parliamentarians. Most, if not all, modern entrants to the party systems do so through the ranks of local councils. It is here that their introduction to political chicanery begins in earnest. Good, loyal and thoughtful politicians are turned by their party and the inevitable slide to self preservation begins. Some will be content to milk the system for what they can get, while others will claw their way to the top and go on to Westminster, where the 'rewards' are even greater. Party loyalty is rewarded with high office, dissent is punished by obscurity. Be under no illusion, this model is true for ALL parties.
Whatever you perceive a "proper job" to be, it will not, it can not, fight against this regimen of Party control. Indeed, it is my belief that the Party would not have it any other way.

by oftenwrong Mon Jul 30, 2012 9:31 am

Whatever you perceive a "proper job" to be, it will not, it can not, fight against this regimen of Party control. Indeed, it is my belief that the Party would not have it any other way.

Which, if true, renders the topic question unanswerable. It doesn't matter what people did before becoming an MP if they are always going to follow The Party Line.

by Bunnyrunner Mon Jul 30, 2012 2:58 pm

oftenwrong wrote:

Whatever you perceive a "proper job" to be, it will not, it can not, fight against this regimen of Party control. Indeed, it is my belief that the Party would not have it any other way.

Which, if true, renders the topic question unanswerable. It doesn't matter what people did before becoming an MP if they are always going to follow The Party Line.

Indeed and thus exposes the huge fault of "Party Politics" and the damage it does to any notion of National Democracy. The artificial construct of 'opposition' produces that farce we see week in, week out in our parliament. It has lead to the end of Socialism and the birth of a right wing Labour government, whose only purpose was to win an election. In turn, it has gone on to produce a Tory Government that now stands to the right of Genghis Khan in an effort show how different it is.

by polyglide Mon Jul 30, 2012 3:20 pm

So far as I can see many of the present lot of MPs would be hard pressed to find anyone who would employ them.

Party Politics should not have the effect they have on the present situation we face.

Point scoring seems to be the only pass time some MPs have, in finacial terms it is obvious that something has to be done to save our economy, yet instead of working together we have MPs acting like little children repeating the scripts written by others to point score.

Why would any person fit for office have a number of other people to advise on every move made?

There are hard times ahead and we will not get any answers from the present lot nor any that follow because the whole system is flawed towards self preservation of the individuals involved.

by Mel Mon Jul 30, 2012 3:23 pm

Agreed Bunny. However, who when and how can/will this all change?
That change may never come about and in the meantime we should be voting for the party who favours the majority the most. Unfortunately the present one favours only the few, their own kind.

by oftenwrong Mon Jul 30, 2012 5:17 pm

MPs have far too much to say about their own conditions of employment.

THEY decide how much to pay themselves, including most noticeably pay-rises at regular intervals. THEY decide how much pension to award themselves. As we have seen, THEY decide what expenses may be appropriate.

Since it is WE, the taxpayers who actually fund the sums they generously award themselves, it must surely be time that WE had a hand in deciding the Terms of their Contract of Employment.

Which they would be free to reject, and seek alternative employment.

by Mel Mon Jul 30, 2012 6:00 pm

"time that WE had a hand in deciding the Terms of their Contract of Employment."

I'm sure we would all like to see that happen OW, although not likely in our lifetime nor in our offsprings time I suspect.

by Bunnyrunner Mon Jul 30, 2012 10:01 pm

Now can youse see were this is going? Full Time Professional Parliamentarians, elected to serve their constituents and the Country. Paid a fixed salary over a fixed term and all standing as Independents.

But what else would we need? Well an end to the Lobby System for a start. No more journalists looking for a sound bite and no more professional lobbyists peddling influence for their rich employers and offering executive directorships in return for "favours".

There would be much more but it would require the current (and future) Turkey's voting for Christmas, so it ain't gonna happen.:albino:

by oftenwrong Mon Jul 30, 2012 10:32 pm

Two to one against a change then.

by Mel Tue Jul 31, 2012 11:07 am

"Since it is WE, the taxpayers who actually fund the sums they generously award themselves, it must surely be time that WE had a hand in deciding the Terms of their Contract of Employment"

Perhaps OW, a letter to dear Mr Cameron with that suggestion might be worth a try, eh? innit? Wink

by Ivanhoe Thu Aug 02, 2012 2:08 pm

Ivan wrote:
ED MILIBAND LEADS LIST OF 90 MPS WHO'VE NEVER HAD A 'REAL' JOB
I would have said that George Osborne, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, "leads" the list. That incompetent fool has only ever helped in his daddy's wallpaper shop (Osborne and Little), folded towels in Selfridge's for a very brief period, and been a backroom stooge in Tory Central Office. The only reason the crackhead has now been given the job of ruining the economy is because he was Cameron's mate at the Bullingdon Club. All very much in stark contrast to Ed Balls, who has lectured on Economics at Harvard University and been a newspaper columnist on the subject.

Ivan, I dont regarding any MP in any political party, let alone the Tory party/Government, as fools, or incompetent's. Our politicians have an agenda and they stick to it.

The incompency as far as I am concerned, lays fair and square in the public's domain, few have had any political education, and most vote the way theu always have, hence the Britain we have today.

by Blamhappy Thu Aug 02, 2012 4:31 pm

I think it is partly laziness - people say "I don't understand politics", but they've never actually looked into it! It's also ignorance - people don't seem to realise that "politics" = "life". It's seen as a complex subject that only certain people can get their teeth into.

by bobby Thu Aug 02, 2012 4:48 pm

When we have a General Election after many years of heavily bias Tory media, followed by the Global Banking Crisis which was blamed directly on Gordon Browns doorstep, by that self same media, is it any wonder many temporarily turned away from Labour. We even had the death of Herr Cameron’s disabled Son displayed daily on Herr Cameron’s opportunistic photo shoots, followed by his almost daily interviews telling us how wonderful the NHS was to his late Son, including promises to the general public that the NHS will not have a top down reorganisation, and is safe in his hands. Is it any wonder many of the general public fell for his lies. Who would have thought this accomplished liar would have used his Sons situation to almost win an election.
I believe it is wholly wrong to blame the electorate, after all they (most) base their opinions on what they read, see and hear on a daily basis. Not only that most of the public especially those on lower earnings (possible Labour supporters) are too busy trying to make ends meet, let alone embroil themselves in political matters.

I personally blame the dirty lying bastards that told the lies, not those who are victims of years of Tory Media propaganda. Think about what happened in Italy and Germany to see how effective propaganda can be.

by Ivanhoe Thu Aug 02, 2012 7:03 pm

Blamhappy wrote:I think it is partly laziness - people say "I don't understand politics", but they've never actually looked into it! It's also ignorance - people don't seem to realise that "politics" = "life". It's seen as a complex subject that only certain people can get their teeth into.

Brilliant, I couldnt have put it better myself.

by Ivanhoe Thu Aug 02, 2012 7:05 pm

bobby wrote:When we have a General Election after many years of heavily bias Tory media, followed by the Global Banking Crisis which was blamed directly on Gordon Browns doorstep, by that self same media, is it any wonder many temporarily turned away from Labour. We even had the death of Herr Cameron’s disabled Son displayed daily on Herr Cameron’s opportunistic photo shoots, followed by his almost daily interviews telling us how wonderful the NHS was to his late Son, including promises to the general public that the NHS will not have a top down reorganisation, and is safe in his hands. Is it any wonder many of the general public fell for his lies. Who would have thought this accomplished liar would have used his Sons situation to almost win an election.
I believe it is wholly wrong to blame the electorate, after all they (most) base their opinions on what they read, see and hear on a daily basis. Not only that most of the public especially those on lower earnings (possible Labour supporters) are too busy trying to make ends meet, let alone embroil themselves in political matters.

I personally blame the dirty lying bastards that told the lies, not those who are victims of years of Tory Media propaganda. Think about what happened in Italy and Germany to see how effective propaganda can be.

bobby, Explain the fact the EU Government's always get a consolidated pastings fromn their populas, while we Brit's just take it. ?

by bobby Thu Aug 02, 2012 9:45 pm

Regretfully Ivanhoe, I don't fully understand your question. My failing i'me sure.

by Ivanhoe Thu Aug 02, 2012 9:51 pm

bobby wrote:Regretfully Ivanhoe, I don't fully understand your question. My failing i'me sure.

My question is simply this, the EU populas fight back against their Government's, but we British dont.

by Bunnyrunner Thu Aug 02, 2012 10:25 pm

Blamhappy wrote:I think it is partly laziness - people say "I don't understand politics", but they've never actually looked into it! It's also ignorance - people don't seem to realise that "politics" = "life". It's seen as a complex subject that only certain people can get their teeth into.

A little harsh methinks. I think back to the 60s, when I first became aware of "politics" as a subject. My Father was, up till then, a life long Tory, a working class Irish immigrant, fighting to improve his lot in life by hard work and determination. We would discuss government in the shed, over cups of tea and he taught me to keep an open mind. By this time in his life he'd made and then lost a fortune and that had moulded him into a different man. He instilled in me the need to think for not just myself but to consider the needs of my fellow man.
Fast forward to the present day. I have become apolitical in a big way. I have listened to my family and friends and almost without exception they either have zero interest in politics or actively avoid the subject. Most have not voted since Blair's first term, since for them, politicians don't represent them or their communities.
This is not laziness or apathy, it's a conscious choice based on bitter life experience and so far no political party is trying to change that.:albino:

by Bunnyrunner Thu Aug 02, 2012 10:41 pm

Ivanhoe wrote:
bobby wrote:Regretfully Ivanhoe, I don't fully understand your question. My failing i'me sure.

My question is simply this, the EU populas fight back against their Government's, but we British dont.

Please check out the large building at the end of The Mall.:albino:

by betty.noire Thu Aug 02, 2012 10:56 pm

bobby wrote:When we have a General Election after many years of heavily bias Tory media, followed by the Global Banking Crisis which was blamed directly on Gordon Browns doorstep, by that self same media, is it any wonder many temporarily turned away from Labour. We even had the death of Herr Cameron’s disabled Son displayed daily on Herr Cameron’s opportunistic photo shoots, followed by his almost daily interviews telling us how wonderful the NHS was to his late Son, including promises to the general public that the NHS will not have a top down reorganisation, and is safe in his hands. Is it any wonder many of the general public fell for his lies. Who would have thought this accomplished liar would have used his Sons situation to almost win an election.
I believe it is wholly wrong to blame the electorate, after all they (most) base their opinions on what they read, see and hear on a daily basis. Not only that most of the public especially those on lower earnings (possible Labour supporters) are too busy trying to make ends meet, let alone embroil themselves in political matters.

I personally blame the dirty lying bastards that told the lies, not those who are victims of years of Tory Media propaganda. Think about what happened in Italy and Germany to see how effective propaganda can be.

What a hate filled post Rolling Eyes

by Mel Fri Aug 03, 2012 9:37 am

"What a hate filled post "

Perhaps so and not surprising and yet a genuine, true and IMO a correct view.

"Cameron’s opportunistic photo shoots" TRUE.
"telling us how wonderful the NHS was to his late Son, including promises to the general public that the NHS will not have a top down reorganisation, and is safe in his hands." TRUE.

"When we have a General Election after many years of heavily bias Tory media, followed by the Global Banking Crisis which was blamed directly on Gordon Browns doorstep, by that self same media, is it any wonder many temporarily turned away from Labour. TRUE.

by **Phil Hornby** Fri Aug 03, 2012 10:57 am

"What a hate filled post "

That's what hate -filled governments tend to attract... Rolling Eyes

by oftenwrong Fri Aug 03, 2012 11:13 am

The Tory-led Coalition we now enjoy was the product of voter apathy, not something so tangible as hate.

by Ivanhoe Fri Aug 03, 2012 12:13 pm

oftenwrong wrote:The Tory-led Coalition we now enjoy was the product of voter apathy, not something so tangible as hate.

Voter apathy. Voter gullability. And all backed up via the Murdoch press.

by betty.noire Fri Aug 03, 2012 8:46 pm

Phil Hornby wrote:"What a hate filled post "

That's what hate -filled governments tend to attract...

Some of the phrases used on here really are beyond parody. Hordes of Tories storm troopers goose stepping down the Pall Mall
Laughing

It aint 1938, he ‘aint Herman Goering, and we ‘aint standing on the Brandenburg Gate

by **Phil Hornby** Fri Aug 03, 2012 9:02 pm

While the nature of some descriptions hereabouts of the Tory Party are fairly ugly, they are nowhere near as ugly as the government itself and what it is seeking to do. No amount of poster disapproval will alter that fact... Shocked

by **Ivan** Fri Aug 03, 2012 10:32 pm

Whether someone has had a job before standing for Parliament is neither here nor there. If the voters think that’s important, they can take it into account when casting their ballot.

What is a shame is that some people have such little understanding of politics that they think fascism must involve Germans, goose-stepping and concentration camps. This government has demonised benefit claimants, not Jews, and it’s resulted in a massive increase in hate crimes against disabled people. Terminally ill cancer patients have been told to return to work. Other claimants who were declared fit have since died.

One element of fascism is the transfer of state services from democratic accountability to private corporations, especially ones that are giving financial backing to the party in power. That’s exactly what Cameron and his vile gang of carpetbaggers are doing right now. Meanwhile Boris Johnson is in charge of the Metropolitan Police, which is supposed to be investigating some of Rupert Murdoch’s companies. So what does Johnson do? He hobnobs with Murdoch and has even invited him to the Olympics.

Britain is experiencing fascism, and it will only get worse if this evil government stays in power much longer.
https://cuttingedge2.forumotion.co.uk/t322-are-the-tories-velvet-glove-fascists

by bobby Sat Aug 04, 2012 4:35 pm

Ivanhoe wrote : My question is simply this, the EU populas fight back against their Government's, but we British dont.

I think you give our European Cousins too much credit. When they strike or protest in the streets, its rarely a matter of politics, its usualy that their Government has hit them in the pocket, by raising the costs or allowing the costs of something to rise. They dont go out against a political party, but will protest against any form of unfairness. The vast majority of Italians are more interested in the price of food than they are about political agenda. I'm sure the same could be said of most Europeans including the Brits.

by bobby Sat Aug 04, 2012 4:42 pm

Black Betty wrote: What a hate filled post Rolling Eyes

Well Betty its good to see you can get something right. Yes it is a hate filled post, and believe me when I say I have moderated my usual tone.

I couldn't hate a political party any more than I do either of the Coalition conspiritors. If you think they are not worthy of my hatered, feel free to fight their corner and inform the rest of us why you think them to be any good and unworthy of said hatred.

by Ivanhoe Sat Aug 04, 2012 6:44 pm

bobby wrote:Ivanhoe wrote : My question is simply this, the EU populas fight back against their Government's, but we British dont.

I think you give our European Cousins too much credit. When they strike or protest in the streets, its rarely a matter of politics, its usualy that their Government has hit them in the pocket, by raising the costs or allowing the costs of something to rise. They dont go out against a political party, but will protest against any form of unfairness. The vast majority of Italians are more interested in the price of food than they are about political agenda. I'm sure the same could be said of most Europeans including the Brits.

bobby, please do not confuse the European populas with you average self centred and greedy Brit.

In 2005 when Tony Blair had his stint as Presidency of the EU, Mr Blair secured three veto opt-outs for us British.

In no order of merit, Anthony Blair secured an opt-out on welfare, thus making sure Britain's unemployed would not receive Europe's much higher and non means tested welfare payments.

Mr Blair also secured an opt -out on pensions, thus making sure that Britain's pensioners woud not eceive Europe's much higher State pensions.

And lastly Anthony Blair secured an opt -out on EU taxation. Thus making sure that Britain's workers would not pay Europe's much higher income tax rates.

The point im making bobby, is that when the British protest, they do it feebly, and largely out of self interest, ie I have yet to see a million people on the streets of London campaigning on behalf of the elderly and higher State pensions, no, this generation are quite alone.

But when the European populas protest and strike, they do it out of a national consolidation because the policies as mentioned above re- the European's are set in stone, sacrosanct.

by Bunnyrunner Sat Aug 04, 2012 10:37 pm

Er... "your average self centred and greedy Brit." was a product of the Thatcher years. The "I'm alright Jack" Essex man who was told "Greed is Good".
Then along comes Teflon Tony, promising "Things can only get better"...which of course they didn't. Nu-Labour moved so far to the right it left the Tories nowhere to go and lead directly to the shower we have now. Did Blair do this simply to gain power? I think he did and went on to cynically use that power to his own advantage, his own personal advantage. (In case you hadn't guessed, I don't like him). :albino:

by Sponsored content