This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
I briefly read the headline for this story this morning and assumed it was one of those guest editorships but it turns out he's doing this full time. I'm surprised that UK politics still has the ability to surprise me but this really has. I've always been uneasy about MPs having other jobs but surely editorship of a daily paper (in London when your constituency is up North) takes the piss (even before we get to the issue of press independence)?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39304944
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39304944
20
In reply to Tyler:
Starts work with the paper at 5am, then he'll spend the rest of his day in Parliament or his constituency up North, and the rest of the stuff he's got his slimey hands in. With any luck he'll work himself to an early grave.
I won't be mourning.
Starts work with the paper at 5am, then he'll spend the rest of his day in Parliament or his constituency up North, and the rest of the stuff he's got his slimey hands in. With any luck he'll work himself to an early grave.
I won't be mourning.
9
2
In reply to Tyler:
Whilst knutsford and wilmslow have always felt like the Home Counties, I think this is a massive slap in the chops for his constituents and it isn't even his only other job. I suppose he got used to not thinking about representing his constituents when he was chancellor so it hasn't really occurred to him that being an mp precludes another full time job.
Whilst knutsford and wilmslow have always felt like the Home Counties, I think this is a massive slap in the chops for his constituents and it isn't even his only other job. I suppose he got used to not thinking about representing his constituents when he was chancellor so it hasn't really occurred to him that being an mp precludes another full time job.
2
In reply to Tyler:
Great comment from John Prescott earlier - "I may have been 2 Jags, but he is 6 Jobs"
MP for Tatton: Paid £74,962 a year
Editor, London Evening Standard: Paid £200,000, according to reports
Adviser, BlackRock Investment Institute: Paid £650,000 a year
Chair, Northern Powerhouse Partnership: Unpaid
Kissinger Fellow at the McCain Institute: £120,212 stipend to cover travel and research costs
Washington Speaker's Bureau: Paid nearly £800,000 for engagements since July
What a hard-working chap he is !
Great comment from John Prescott earlier - "I may have been 2 Jags, but he is 6 Jobs"
MP for Tatton: Paid £74,962 a year
Editor, London Evening Standard: Paid £200,000, according to reports
Adviser, BlackRock Investment Institute: Paid £650,000 a year
Chair, Northern Powerhouse Partnership: Unpaid
Kissinger Fellow at the McCain Institute: £120,212 stipend to cover travel and research costs
Washington Speaker's Bureau: Paid nearly £800,000 for engagements since July
What a hard-working chap he is !
8
In reply to toad:
To be fair we don't generally get concerned that ministers (being a cabinet minister, let alone PM, must be at least full time) can't do their constituency work, so why so much concern about other jobs? Further, a common complaint is MPs are professional politicians with no outside experience (a common criticism of Osborne when Chancellor) so it seems a bit unfair to then criticise for them for the opposite when they do have other roles. However, Osborne does seem rather busy now.
To be fair we don't generally get concerned that ministers (being a cabinet minister, let alone PM, must be at least full time) can't do their constituency work, so why so much concern about other jobs? Further, a common complaint is MPs are professional politicians with no outside experience (a common criticism of Osborne when Chancellor) so it seems a bit unfair to then criticise for them for the opposite when they do have other roles. However, Osborne does seem rather busy now.
8
6
In reply to MG:
> To be fair we don't generally get concerned that ministers (being a cabinet minister, let alone PM, must be at least full time) can't do their constituency work, so why so much concern about other jobs?
I guess we kid ourselves that they are doing their best serving the public and are at least doing the job the public pays them for, a necessary evil shall we say. > Further, a common complaint is MPs are professional politicians with no outside experience (a common criticism of Osborne when Chancellor) so it seems a bit unfair to then criticise for them for the opposite when they do have other roles.
Yes a role before coming into politics could be seen as desirable but being paid six figure salaries for part time roles you never had to apply for because of your connections (either through your work as an MP or otherwise) probably makes you less likely to see things from the point of view of 99.999995% of the electorate rather than more. You're going to be even more divorced from reality than career politician. At least a career politician will get to read loads of papers and focus groups etc. about things and meet constituents.> However, Osborne does seem rather busy now.
He and, I dare say, others are taking the piss.Post edited at 15:52
4
In reply to Chris the Tall:
He is NOT an advisor to Blackrock. This position is essentially a reward; a signal to other finance ministers that if they play ball with the financial industry, then they will be rewarded when they leave office.
> BlackRock Investment Institute: Paid £650,000 a year
He is NOT an advisor to Blackrock. This position is essentially a reward; a signal to other finance ministers that if they play ball with the financial industry, then they will be rewarded when they leave office.
18
1
In reply to Shani:
That's a very interesting suggestion and not without merit in principle but why on earth do you think a long running Chancellor wouldn't have some very helpful geopolitical advice to give one of the world's largest fund managers?
> He is NOT an advisor to Blackrock. This position is essentially a reward; a signal to other finance ministers that if they play ball with the financial industry, then they will be rewarded when they leave office.
That's a very interesting suggestion and not without merit in principle but why on earth do you think a long running Chancellor wouldn't have some very helpful geopolitical advice to give one of the world's largest fund managers?
4
In reply to BnB:
What advice, not in the public domain, do you think he has access to? The answer may seem obvious but if it is not in the public domain do you think it should be available to those prepared to pay an individual a large sum of money and no one else?
> That's a very interesting suggestion and not without merit in principle but why on earth do you think a long running Chancellor wouldn't have some very helpful geopolitical advice to give one of the world's largest fund managers?
What advice, not in the public domain, do you think he has access to? The answer may seem obvious but if it is not in the public domain do you think it should be available to those prepared to pay an individual a large sum of money and no one else?
8
In reply to Tyler:
He has his pretty extensive experience in one of the toughest finance jobs going and his knowledge of personalities and policies across the world. G8 summit anyone?
As a former, i.e. not current, member of the government I don't see a conflict of interest and nor does parliament.
His presence in negotiations on Blackrock's behalf adds considerable weight. You don't have to like him to see the sense in his appointment!!
He has his pretty extensive experience in one of the toughest finance jobs going and his knowledge of personalities and policies across the world. G8 summit anyone?
As a former, i.e. not current, member of the government I don't see a conflict of interest and nor does parliament.
His presence in negotiations on Blackrock's behalf adds considerable weight. You don't have to like him to see the sense in his appointment!!
1
In reply to Tyler: I do enjoy Marina Hyde when she's got a monk on
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/17/george-osborne-editor...
' "An editor of substance" -what substance? Crystal meth?'
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/17/george-osborne-editor...
' "An editor of substance" -what substance? Crystal meth?'
3
In reply to BnB:
Also bilderberg group.
> He has his pretty extensive experience in one of the toughest finance jobs going and his knowledge of personalities and policies across the world. G8 summit anyone...
Also bilderberg group.
In reply to BnB:
Of course I do in the same way as I see the sense in bribing a planning officer if I wanted to build on greenbelt land, if it were legal to do so. They would enable me to do something, which by dint of their position, no one else could. What is Osborne is able to do for Blackrock that no one else can? You've tried to answer but he will have far less knowledge of the companies Blackrock invest in than other Blackrock employees who's job it is to sift through their accounts etc. He will be no better at predicting markets than a computer model or specialist in a particular field and a company of that size will have teams of people who will know far more about policies than Osborne could contain in his head (he simply won't have the time to learn). So, what tangible info does he have not in the public domain that will add £650k PA to Blackrocks profit? I'd suggest that the only thing he can provide is access to the govt to influence policy or knowledge of future policy not yet revealed. He may know that a particular govt minister of a certain country may enjoy a particular type of cigar or vintage wine but that info would only be worth something if they were trying to influence them through a bribe of some type.
So rather than generalities can you give me an example of knowledge/advice that GO could give to a company that's worth £650k PA that they don't have access to by other means?
> He has his pretty extensive experience in one of the toughest finance jobs going and his knowledge of personalities and policies across the world. G8 summit anyone
> As a former, i.e. not current, member of the government I don't see a conflict of interest and nor does parliament.His presence in negotiations on Blackrock's behalf adds considerable weight. You don't have to like him to see the sense in his appointment!!
Of course I do in the same way as I see the sense in bribing a planning officer if I wanted to build on greenbelt land, if it were legal to do so. They would enable me to do something, which by dint of their position, no one else could. What is Osborne is able to do for Blackrock that no one else can? You've tried to answer but he will have far less knowledge of the companies Blackrock invest in than other Blackrock employees who's job it is to sift through their accounts etc. He will be no better at predicting markets than a computer model or specialist in a particular field and a company of that size will have teams of people who will know far more about policies than Osborne could contain in his head (he simply won't have the time to learn). So, what tangible info does he have not in the public domain that will add £650k PA to Blackrocks profit? I'd suggest that the only thing he can provide is access to the govt to influence policy or knowledge of future policy not yet revealed. He may know that a particular govt minister of a certain country may enjoy a particular type of cigar or vintage wine but that info would only be worth something if they were trying to influence them through a bribe of some type.
So rather than generalities can you give me an example of knowledge/advice that GO could give to a company that's worth £650k PA that they don't have access to by other means?
Post edited at 17:01
8
1
In reply to Tyler:
He understands as few can how treasury departments and lenders of last resort around the world are likely to respond to macroeconomic forces. Likely better than any financial analyst because who else is better placed to weigh up the political aspects of their decisions? Often central banks will do the opposite of logical because of the impact of their policies on behaviour. You do understand that investing is about predicting the future, don't you? Not just company profits, but interest rates, government borrowing, bond issues.
He understands as few can how treasury departments and lenders of last resort around the world are likely to respond to macroeconomic forces. Likely better than any financial analyst because who else is better placed to weigh up the political aspects of their decisions? Often central banks will do the opposite of logical because of the impact of their policies on behaviour. You do understand that investing is about predicting the future, don't you? Not just company profits, but interest rates, government borrowing, bond issues.
Post edited at 17:16
2
2
In reply to Tyler:
Osbourne has say friends who sit in the top of other banks, governing bodies, advisory groups etc... his knowledge or influence of those who are involved in stopping or allowing banking transaction charges or mergers. Regulations on banks loan to asset ratio.
It's no that he thinks stock x will rise tomorrow, but bigger picture policy stuff.
Osbourne has say friends who sit in the top of other banks, governing bodies, advisory groups etc... his knowledge or influence of those who are involved in stopping or allowing banking transaction charges or mergers. Regulations on banks loan to asset ratio.
It's no that he thinks stock x will rise tomorrow, but bigger picture policy stuff.
In reply to BnB:
> He understands as few can how treasury departments and lenders of last resort around the world are likely to respond to macroeconomic forces.
As would anyone who has studied these things, if he can predict them with certainty then the response must be predetermined based on the inputs and others would be able to do the same. The thing is, as you've said yourself, the response will not necessarily be logical so all he is offering is an opinion. Which brings me on to.......> Likely better than any financial analyst because who else is better placed to weigh up the political aspects of their decisions?
Well I would say an analyst who's job it is study these things 40-50 hours per week and has done so for years after studying the subject to a high academic level for years. Not someone who is now very part time regardless of high up they may previously have been. > Often central banks will do the opposite of logical because of the impact of their policies on behaviour. You do understand that investing is about predicting the future, don't you? Not just company profits, but interest rates, government borrowing, bond issues.
You misunderstand, I was talking about the profits of Blackrock. If they are paying out £650k PA for something they'll want a return on their investment. I'd say that return is the ability to get to senior figures in govt and possibly (it's not a given but a gamble worth taking) influence policy. You, on the other hand, see it as GO being uniquely knowledgeable on economics and a soothsayer like ability to predict markets that is not possible from having teams of experts and computer models studying the data. I'm not saying he doesn't have knowledge or insight, I'm saying it's less than is available from other cheaper sources and not what he is being paid for. We'll have to agree to disagree.
7
2
In reply to summo:
> Osbourne has say friends who sit in the top of other banks, governing bodies, advisory groups etc... his knowledge or influence of those who are involved in stopping or allowing banking transaction charges or mergers.
That is exactly what I am saying he's being paid for, his ability to influence public bodies, not his innate knowledge as BnB is trying to contend. > Regulations on banks loan to asset ratio.It's no that he thinks stock x will rise tomorrow, but bigger picture policy stuff.
But regulations and policy stuff are public domain and there will be many cheaper and better sources of this. Osbourne is only worth his wage if he has knowledge of these prior to them being made or the ability to alter them in favour of his employers (what would be known as insider trading if it were done by you or me). That is what I and many others see as being wrong, policy being influenced in favour of a single private company by an MP, I'm surprised you are ok with that. I'm not naive enough to think this hasn't always gone on but that doesn't mean it doesn't stink.Post edited at 17:42
3
2
In reply to FactorXXX:
That's not really a sensible question. All of the knowledge of a senior hospital consultant or of a senior commercial lawyer is "in the public domain" -- none of it is secret -- and yet it still might be worth paying such people lots of money to advise you. The fact that all the knowledge is "public" doesn't mean that you can readily access it and make good decisions taking it all into account.
> So, what tangible info does he have not in the public domain that will add £650k PA to Blackrocks profit?
That's not really a sensible question. All of the knowledge of a senior hospital consultant or of a senior commercial lawyer is "in the public domain" -- none of it is secret -- and yet it still might be worth paying such people lots of money to advise you. The fact that all the knowledge is "public" doesn't mean that you can readily access it and make good decisions taking it all into account.
7
In reply to toad:
She's brilliant.
> I do enjoy Marina Hyde when she's got a monk onhttps://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/17/george-osborne-editor... "An editor of substance" -what substance? Crystal meth?'
She's brilliant.
2
1
In reply to Coel Hellier:
They're buying influence, which isn't, in my book, ethical. It's no different from cash for questions for example, and it's a scourge of our democracy.
> That's not really a sensible question. All of the knowledge of a senior hospital consultant or of a senior commercial lawyer is "in the public domain" -- none of it is secret -- and yet it still might be worth paying such people lots of money to advise you. The fact that all the knowledge is "public" doesn't mean that you can readily access it and make good decisions taking it all into account.
They're buying influence, which isn't, in my book, ethical. It's no different from cash for questions for example, and it's a scourge of our democracy.
5
1
In reply to Tyler:
You're quite right, and from the likes / dislikes balance on view there's a lot of ethically-challenged people (or forelock tuggers) on the forum.
You're quite right, and from the likes / dislikes balance on view there's a lot of ethically-challenged people (or forelock tuggers) on the forum.
4
3
In reply to Coel Hellier:
Tyler - this (above!).
You are being myopic about this because of your hatred of the situation (I don't know whether it is against right wing politics, the finance industry, politics in general, George Osborne in particular, or perhaps all of that.)
He is being paid to give understanding and insight that someone with his experience and connections can give, that is unique to someone of his experience and connections. That is how business works. (maybe that is the bit you don't get.)
That is how the world works, you pay for the best advice and insight you can afford. None may be needed. You may not be able to afford any. You might just be able to afford a career analyst. Or you might be able to afford the ex chancellor of the UK.
> That's not really a sensible question. All of the knowledge of a senior hospital consultant or of a senior commercial lawyer is "in the public domain" -- none of it is secret -- and yet it still might be worth paying such people lots of money to advise you. The fact that all the knowledge is "public" doesn't mean that you can readily access it and make good decisions taking it all into account.
Tyler - this (above!).
You are being myopic about this because of your hatred of the situation (I don't know whether it is against right wing politics, the finance industry, politics in general, George Osborne in particular, or perhaps all of that.)
He is being paid to give understanding and insight that someone with his experience and connections can give, that is unique to someone of his experience and connections. That is how business works. (maybe that is the bit you don't get.)
That is how the world works, you pay for the best advice and insight you can afford. None may be needed. You may not be able to afford any. You might just be able to afford a career analyst. Or you might be able to afford the ex chancellor of the UK.
3
1
In reply to Tyler:
Never said I was ok with it. I think 2nd jobs for all MPs should be banned.
If 600ish MPs can have 2nd jobs, why not just cull 200 MPs, redraw the boundaries and make 400 MPs work full time for the taxpayer.
Never said I was ok with it. I think 2nd jobs for all MPs should be banned.
If 600ish MPs can have 2nd jobs, why not just cull 200 MPs, redraw the boundaries and make 400 MPs work full time for the taxpayer.
8
In reply to Tyler:
Ignoring the conflicts of interest and the fact that he is claiming he can do two full time jobs and four part time jobs, it's one big f*ck off to the north of England. He obviously considers being a cheerleader far more important than two of his other jobs.
Ignoring the conflicts of interest and the fact that he is claiming he can do two full time jobs and four part time jobs, it's one big f*ck off to the north of England. He obviously considers being a cheerleader far more important than two of his other jobs.
6
2
In reply to ClimberEd:
That's fine, but he already has what his electors presumably thought would be a full-time job - their MP, funded by the tax payer. He needs to do one or the other and stop pretending that he can do both.
That's fine, but he already has what his electors presumably thought would be a full-time job - their MP, funded by the tax payer. He needs to do one or the other and stop pretending that he can do both.
3
In reply to BnB:
I see the sense in his appointment, it isn't advice, it's access to power.
> He has his pretty extensive experience in one of the toughest finance jobs going and his knowledge of personalities and policies across the world. G8 summit anyone?As a former, i.e. not current, member of the government I don't see a conflict of interest and nor does parliament.His presence in negotiations on Blackrock's behalf adds considerable weight. You don't have to like him to see the sense in his appointment!!
I see the sense in his appointment, it isn't advice, it's access to power.
2
1
In reply to summo:
What "work" do you want them to do? Full-time consideration of how they'll vote? Personally I think having too many career politicians is a bad idea, and that the perspective of having other interests and careers is valuable.
So, an alternative suggestion. Require *all* MPs to have non-politics job as their main job! Make the work they do voting in Parliament a 2nd job.
> I think 2nd jobs for all MPs should be banned. [...] make 400 MPs work full time for the taxpayer.
What "work" do you want them to do? Full-time consideration of how they'll vote? Personally I think having too many career politicians is a bad idea, and that the perspective of having other interests and careers is valuable.
So, an alternative suggestion. Require *all* MPs to have non-politics job as their main job! Make the work they do voting in Parliament a 2nd job.
1
1
In reply to Coel Hellier:
I'm surprised at you,tbh. Do you know how most constituency MPs spend their time? Good backbenchers aren't just lobby fodder. Try going to a surgery sometime, or even just watch some of the committees at work
> What "work" do you want them to do? Full-time consideration of how they'll vote?
I'm surprised at you,tbh. Do you know how most constituency MPs spend their time? Good backbenchers aren't just lobby fodder. Try going to a surgery sometime, or even just watch some of the committees at work
1
1
In reply to toad:
Committee work is important, yes, but constituency work is really not what they should be doing. We elect MPs to go to Parliament. Acting as social workers or problem solvers for their constituents is really not what they should be doing (they do it so that people will vote for them).
> Do you know how most constituency MPs spend their time? Good backbenchers aren't just lobby fodder. Try going to a surgery sometime, or even just watch some of the committees at work
Committee work is important, yes, but constituency work is really not what they should be doing. We elect MPs to go to Parliament. Acting as social workers or problem solvers for their constituents is really not what they should be doing (they do it so that people will vote for them).
1
5
In reply to Coel Hellier:
Don't underestimate the impact an MPs intervention can have on local issues. I've seen big companies stonewall for years until a diligent backbencher gets involved. Conversely my mp was a cabinet minister which really hamstrung his involvement in some local issues
Don't underestimate the impact an MPs intervention can have on local issues. I've seen big companies stonewall for years until a diligent backbencher gets involved. Conversely my mp was a cabinet minister which really hamstrung his involvement in some local issues
2
1
In reply to Coel Hellier:
You've decided that, but they are the respesentative of these people, actually interacting with them is an important part of the democratic process. Personally I don't see his new London centric job as compatible with his constituency job or his role with the Northern Powerhouse.
> Committee work is important, yes, but constituency work is really not what they should be doing. We elect MPs to go to Parliament. Acting as social workers or problem solvers for their constituents is really not what they should be doing (they do it so that people will vote for them).
You've decided that, but they are the respesentative of these people, actually interacting with them is an important part of the democratic process. Personally I don't see his new London centric job as compatible with his constituency job or his role with the Northern Powerhouse.
6
1
In reply to BnB:
Hahahaha, nope. No conflict of interest here. Not at all.
Pocket lining scum bags.
> As a former, i.e. not current, member of the government I don't see a conflict of interest and nor does parliament.
Hahahaha, nope. No conflict of interest here. Not at all.
Pocket lining scum bags.
2
2
In reply to Coel Hellier:
If you have 400 full time MPs you can pay them more. It might draw some talent from industry into respective posts and actually reduce career politicians. But it is up to the public who they vote in?
What can they do? Have less parliament recesses or holidays to start with. More constituency meetings. More links with industry that generate the taxes, with more liason with the public sector who spend it.
Perhaps I've simplified things too much, but if you can hold down a 2nd job, a few directorships, some well paid advisory and public speaking posts then perhaps the taxpayer isn't getting value for money from an MP.
> What "work" do you want them to do? Full-time consideration of how they'll vote? Personally I think having too many career politicians is a bad idea, and that the perspective of having other interests and careers is valuable.So, an alternative suggestion. Require *all* MPs to have non-politics job as their main job! Make the work they do voting in Parliament a 2nd job.
If you have 400 full time MPs you can pay them more. It might draw some talent from industry into respective posts and actually reduce career politicians. But it is up to the public who they vote in?
What can they do? Have less parliament recesses or holidays to start with. More constituency meetings. More links with industry that generate the taxes, with more liason with the public sector who spend it.
Perhaps I've simplified things too much, but if you can hold down a 2nd job, a few directorships, some well paid advisory and public speaking posts then perhaps the taxpayer isn't getting value for money from an MP.
Post edited at 05:41
3
1
In reply to The New NickB:
I can't believe that I am saying this, but George Osborne *may* be one of the more rational, one nation Tory, internationalist politicians that we have.
If he is doing what it takes to displace swivel-eyed loons like TM and most of her cabinet from holding on to power indefinitely then that may be a good thing. All we need now is an equivalent Labour politician to emerge and there may yet be a return to rational politics within my lifetime.
I can't believe that I am saying this, but George Osborne *may* be one of the more rational, one nation Tory, internationalist politicians that we have.
If he is doing what it takes to displace swivel-eyed loons like TM and most of her cabinet from holding on to power indefinitely then that may be a good thing. All we need now is an equivalent Labour politician to emerge and there may yet be a return to rational politics within my lifetime.
1
1
In reply to Tyler:
Perhaps he has taken the job to prepare for his redundancy as an MP.
http://www.alderleyedge.com/news/article/14334/tatton-constituency-to-be-sc...
Perhaps he has taken the job to prepare for his redundancy as an MP.
http://www.alderleyedge.com/news/article/14334/tatton-constituency-to-be-sc...
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
I think from a social perspective Cameron and Osborne were more liberal than May, the female Farage, and her acolytes. Liam Fox is practically insane. I hope you're right that we're going through a temporary period of mass insanity and that normal order resumes before too much damage is done.
> I can't believe that I am saying this, but George Osborne *may* be one of the more rational, one nation Tory, internationalist politicians that we have.If he is doing what it takes to displace swivel-eyed loons like TM and most of her cabinet from holding on to power indefinitely then that may be a good thing. All we need now is an equivalent Labour politician to emerge and there may yet be a return to rational politics within my lifetime.
I think from a social perspective Cameron and Osborne were more liberal than May, the female Farage, and her acolytes. Liam Fox is practically insane. I hope you're right that we're going through a temporary period of mass insanity and that normal order resumes before too much damage is done.
2
1
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:
He may be doing this in part to push an agenda that slightly overlaps my views regarding Europe, but it is still pretty rotten.
He may be doing this in part to push an agenda that slightly overlaps my views regarding Europe, but it is still pretty rotten.
1
In reply to toad:
I think he can afford proper cocaine
> I do enjoy Marina Hyde when she's got a monk onhttps://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/mar/17/george-osborne-editor... "An editor of substance" -what substance? Crystal meth?'
I think he can afford proper cocaine
1
In reply to Baron Weasel:
Funny you should say that...
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/media/evening-standard-to-be-paper-for-b...
> I think he can afford proper cocaine
Funny you should say that...
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/media/evening-standard-to-be-paper-for-b...
1
In reply to Tyler:
He is probably bored and looking for things to do. At his age and with his experience ( he was a well known delegator) he is probably the sort of alpha person who rattles through these things and still has time for the family.
He is probably bored and looking for things to do. At his age and with his experience ( he was a well known delegator) he is probably the sort of alpha person who rattles through these things and still has time for the family.
In reply to neilh:
I've got a mad idea for something he could do - represent his constituents effectively and make the world a better place.
> He is probably bored and looking for things to do.
I've got a mad idea for something he could do - represent his constituents effectively and make the world a better place.
2
In reply to bouldery bits:
His constituency is about to be redrawn and dissolved..........and is surrounded by other Tory seats. .........
His constituency is about to be redrawn and dissolved..........and is surrounded by other Tory seats. .........
In reply to Tyler:
I suppose, in that there is a vacuum of an opposition at the moment, it will not be a bad thing to have someone with a big voice disagreeing with and arguing against the Party Doctrine.
I suppose, in that there is a vacuum of an opposition at the moment, it will not be a bad thing to have someone with a big voice disagreeing with and arguing against the Party Doctrine.
In reply to neilh:
Not for three years, I appreciate that the good people of Tatton perhaps haven't shown the best judgement over the years when electing Members of Parliament, but it seems a little extreme to deny them proper representation.
> His constituency is about to be redrawn and dissolved..........and is surrounded by other Tory seats. .........
Not for three years, I appreciate that the good people of Tatton perhaps haven't shown the best judgement over the years when electing Members of Parliament, but it seems a little extreme to deny them proper representation.
1
1
In reply to neilh:
Yes. And until then?
> His constituency is about to be redrawn and dissolved..........and is surrounded by other Tory seats. .........
Yes. And until then?
In reply to The New NickB:
I'm pretty sure the Northern Powerhouse moved back down to London a while back so that aspect should not be a problem.
I'm pretty sure the Northern Powerhouse moved back down to London a while back so that aspect should not be a problem.
In reply to Chris the Tall:
Talk about snouts in the trough.
> Great comment from John Prescott earlier - "I may have been 2 Jags, but he is 6 Jobs"MP for Tatton: Paid £74,962 a yearEditor, London Evening Standard: Paid £200,000, according to reportsAdviser, BlackRock Investment Institute: Paid £650,000 a yearChair, Northern Powerhouse Partnership: UnpaidKissinger Fellow at the McCain Institute: £120,212 stipend to cover travel and research costsWashington Speaker's Bureau: Paid nearly £800,000 for engagements since JulyWhat a hard-working chap he is !
Talk about snouts in the trough.
1
1
In reply to The New NickB:
Well as I drive through knutsford past the McLaren dealership, the rolls Royce dealership and the Range Rover dealership I would not be too concerned.it us hardly an area of social depravation crying out for a good constituency mp . Mind you at least he got the m6 link road approved to avoid all those multi millionaire houses in mere
Well as I drive through knutsford past the McLaren dealership, the rolls Royce dealership and the Range Rover dealership I would not be too concerned.it us hardly an area of social depravation crying out for a good constituency mp . Mind you at least he got the m6 link road approved to avoid all those multi millionaire houses in mere
1
1
1
1
1
In reply to neilh:
Realistic in what respect, beyond saying it is weathy constituency. Firstly, not everyone in the constituency is a multi-millionaire, the vast majority are working people who can't bring in a team of lawyers every time they have a problem, there are even poor people. All these people, including those buying Bentleys are entitled to proper democratic representation.
> But a realistic perspective....
Realistic in what respect, beyond saying it is weathy constituency. Firstly, not everyone in the constituency is a multi-millionaire, the vast majority are working people who can't bring in a team of lawyers every time they have a problem, there are even poor people. All these people, including those buying Bentleys are entitled to proper democratic representation.
1
1
In reply to Tyler:
It's simply the fault of the rules on second jobs for MPs and George is making a lot of his colleagues nervous as it may force a rethink. I think an MPs role should be defined as something like an exclusive 3/4 days a week focus in the periods Parliament sits and what they do in their own time is up to them. Taking on a really full-on full-time job like Editor of the Evening Standard should simply be against the rules. Moaning about the rest of the stuff he does is self righteous and self defeating for the quality of our MPs. Its hardly even hypocritical compared to what some of the old socialists are doing.
Unlike Coel I think the constituency link is an important part of our democracy... its important generally that the MP is in touch with real people and local issues in the flesh and as a last resort route that has helped thousands deal with dumb shit in our system. There should be minimum rules for this (but an attendance policy would be OTT).
It's simply the fault of the rules on second jobs for MPs and George is making a lot of his colleagues nervous as it may force a rethink. I think an MPs role should be defined as something like an exclusive 3/4 days a week focus in the periods Parliament sits and what they do in their own time is up to them. Taking on a really full-on full-time job like Editor of the Evening Standard should simply be against the rules. Moaning about the rest of the stuff he does is self righteous and self defeating for the quality of our MPs. Its hardly even hypocritical compared to what some of the old socialists are doing.
Unlike Coel I think the constituency link is an important part of our democracy... its important generally that the MP is in touch with real people and local issues in the flesh and as a last resort route that has helped thousands deal with dumb shit in our system. There should be minimum rules for this (but an attendance policy would be OTT).
4
1
1
1
In reply to BnB:
Because he doesn't have "very helpful geopolitical advice to give one of the world's largest fund managers". Fund managers are interested in financial decisions and shmoozing the people who have that power NOW - not those that had it and have lost it.
This is what i mean by George Osborne being rewarded now for what he did whilst in power. In power, he introduced pension reforms and, stamp duty exemptions for investment funds and exchange traded funds - all of which were welcomed by Blackrock. George Osborne's chief economic advisor, Rupert Harrison, was claimed to be behind some of these policies and had meetings with Blackrock at the time some of these decisions were being made - something the Treasury initially denied but then admitted to.
Harrison then went to work for .......Blackrock! Huzzah! Trebles all round!
WRT the pension changes, Blackrock claimed to be uniquely positioned to take advantage of the £1.5bn changes as they specialise in retirement investment.
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....
> That's a very interesting suggestion and not without merit in principle but why on earth do you think a long running Chancellor wouldn't have some very helpful geopolitical advice to give one of the world's largest fund managers?
Because he doesn't have "very helpful geopolitical advice to give one of the world's largest fund managers". Fund managers are interested in financial decisions and shmoozing the people who have that power NOW - not those that had it and have lost it.
This is what i mean by George Osborne being rewarded now for what he did whilst in power. In power, he introduced pension reforms and, stamp duty exemptions for investment funds and exchange traded funds - all of which were welcomed by Blackrock. George Osborne's chief economic advisor, Rupert Harrison, was claimed to be behind some of these policies and had meetings with Blackrock at the time some of these decisions were being made - something the Treasury initially denied but then admitted to.
Harrison then went to work for .......Blackrock! Huzzah! Trebles all round!
WRT the pension changes, Blackrock claimed to be uniquely positioned to take advantage of the £1.5bn changes as they specialise in retirement investment.
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....
Post edited at 15:33
4
In reply to neilh:
Yes, many times, it is barely 20 miles away and I have several friends in the area.
> Have you ever been there?
Yes, many times, it is barely 20 miles away and I have several friends in the area.
Post edited at 18:13
1
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...