Eric Pickles on Question Time last night

[im]

Shay HTFC said:

I wonder what the page count would be at if this were a Labour MP we were talking about.

Now call me a cynic but I reckon...'bout....

1,259,218,462,164,468,014














...on its first day...

[Parrot of Doom]

sleep envy said:

Parrot of Doom said:

That's a very poor comparison. If your CEO told you that your job would in future entail working on two sites, 37 miles apart across London, with no change in conditions or salary, but longer hours - would you still work for him?

in future?

MPs generally know they have a constiunency somewhere in the country and have to attend parliament when they go for the interview in smith square

it doesn't get sprung on them once they've signed the contract and have been shown around the office along with rest of the new intake

You're taking my comments completely out of context. I never said that an MP would not know the conditions of his/her employment before taking on the job.

[Famous Graham]

Parrot of Doom said:

sleep envy said:

Parrot of Doom said:

That's a very poor comparison. If your CEO told you that your job would in future entail working on two sites, 37 miles apart across London, with no change in conditions or salary, but longer hours - would you still work for him?

in future?

MPs generally know they have a constiunency somewhere in the country and have to attend parliament when they go for the interview in smith square

it doesn't get sprung on them once they've signed the contract and have been shown around the office along with rest of the new intake

You're taking my comments completely out of context. I never said that an MP would not know the conditions of his/her employment before taking on the job.

Yet your amendment to my comparison DID include a future change in circumstances. So by your own logic, you've just rendered your amendment inaccurate.

[skoff]

ipitythefool said:

skoff said:

[I don't see how talent can be attracted any other way than with good salary.

Define talent.

Why can't a nurse become an MP? Why do you have to attract lawyers, bankers and successful businesspeople?

Again point taken, but I am not sure that a nurse has the appropriate skills for making decisions about things like economic policy, foreign policy, defence, etc... I think there is a very good case for having a nurse being responsible for the NHS, as long as they were able to manage the budget effectively. I still think the salary would have to be good to get somebody competent and willing to take the responsibility. A random person from a random 'normal' job would probably run a mile if offered a job as an MP.

[Digga]

If this is democracy I'll show my arse in Woolliees wind... oh hang on.

This is what you get when the population sits back and allows incompetants, inadequates and bed wetters to have the run of the major political parties, unhindered.

[Parrot of Doom]

F i F said:

Most, but admittedly not all, politicians are grubby sleazy conniving grabbing lying cheating bds that are worse than the scummiest sleaziest obnoxious chav in chavsville.

Fawkes had the right idea. They have lost touch with reality.

/rant

No, only a few would meet that description. And Guy Fawkes aim was to murder the monarch and the protestant aristocracy, because as catholics they were persecuted by the state. Hardly a comparable situation to a few MPs taking the piss.

[skoff]

Shay HTFC said:

I wonder what the page count would be at if this were a Labour MP we were talking about.

Pistonheads is so Tory

Well the same arguments apply, only more-so, to Tony McNulty. His '2nd house' was only saving him a commute of 9 miles. It seems he was perfectly within the rules, but that's hardly the point, and he gets paid his Minister salary too.

[Mr POD]

esselte said:

Sheets Tabuer said:

Why not just have an MP hostel nearby, they have needed to travel there for 100s of years you'd have thought they'd have built something by now.

Why would they when there's the "expenses gravy train" taht they can get on...?

350 twin rooms so they can share.

[Parrot of Doom]

Famous Graham said:

Parrot of Doom said:

sleep envy said:

Parrot of Doom said:

That's a very poor comparison. If your CEO told you that your job would in future entail working on two sites, 37 miles apart across London, with no change in conditions or salary, but longer hours - would you still work for him?

in future?

MPs generally know they have a constiunency somewhere in the country and have to attend parliament when they go for the interview in smith square

it doesn't get sprung on them once they've signed the contract and have been shown around the office along with rest of the new intake

You're taking my comments completely out of context. I never said that an MP would not know the conditions of his/her employment before taking on the job.

Yet your amendment to my comparison DID include a future change in circumstances. So by your own logic, you've just rendered your amendment inaccurate.

God, it's like trying to piss through cold jelly. You want to talk about future changes in circumstances? Lets just have a look at your original post:

Famous Graham said:

That's not the point though, is it? It's who's paying for that closer flat.

I currently live 15 mins walk from my office. If I decide to buy a house 40 miles away but ask my CEO to pay the rent/mortgage on the existing place here in town, what do you think the answer would be?

If he doesn't like the commute, then move house ffs.

[Gaspode]

minerva said:

ipitythefool said:

I laugh when I hear people who work 35 hour weeks complaining about MP's perks.

The average MP will work nearly 100 hours a week, and be on call 24hrs a day 7 days a week even when they're on holiday.

Are you sure? I cannot help but think that is an exaggeration. I was a junior doctor, working over 100 hours a week (a few years back!) and I lost a hell of a lot of weight, was almost deleriously tired most of the time, couldn't maintain a proper relationship etc.

I don't see that mirrored in fatty pickles and the others.

Yes, but don't forget that you were spending your 100 hours caring for people, making life-or-death decisions, and generally doing a vital and important job.

MPs, on the other hand, spend their 100 hours talking bks.

[Digga]

Gaspode said:

minerva said:

ipitythefool said:

I laugh when I hear people who work 35 hour weeks complaining about MP's perks.

The average MP will work nearly 100 hours a week, and be on call 24hrs a day 7 days a week even when they're on holiday.

Are you sure? I cannot help but think that is an exaggeration. I was a junior doctor, working over 100 hours a week (a few years back!) and I lost a hell of a lot of weight, was almost deleriously tired most of the time, couldn't maintain a proper relationship etc.

I don't see that mirrored in fatty pickles and the others.

Yes, but don't forget that you were spending your 100 hours caring for people, making life-or-death decisions, and generally doing a vital and important job.

MPs, on the other hand, spend their 100 hours talking bks.

Until fat s like Mr Pickles helped push us over the economic abyss clutching a anvil-sized bunch of debt, there were hundreds, if not thousands of people working in factories all over the UK, clocking up well into 100hrs and travelling at least 30 mins each way to and from work, all on an average basic wage.

[crankedup]

skoff said:

crankedup said:

You have to pay huge amounts of money to attract top talent!! utter piffle. The same old clap trap bankers used to use to line thier pockets. If people want to work in politics then do the same as the general population of this Country, decide, look at salary structure, if you still feel you have the burning desire go for it. We need to get away from this 'top people, top money' nonsense and return to some ethics and honesty again.

Point taken about the bankers, but that was more down to poor recruitment of people for the job with no qualifications or relevant experience.

I don't see how talent can be attracted any other way than with good salary. In a utopian society then yes we would have honest selfless people running the country, but the trouble is there are many many commercial organisations only too happy to pay big £££s to get successful people on board with a proven track record - how do you compete with that other than with comparable salaries?

But I see the counter to my argument as 'old money', do we not have to wake up and realize that the big money is no longer going to be out there. Well OK, some top private Companies might still survive on 'old money' thinking but in truth those days are gone. Don't get me wrong here, people who have brushes in thier tool cabinet will still be paid less than somebody with an leather attache case with tools of the desk in it, I just feel that the difference will be significantly reduced over the next decade.

[crankedup]

skoff said:

ipitythefool said:

skoff said:

[I don't see how talent can be attracted any other way than with good salary.

Define talent.

Why can't a nurse become an MP? Why do you have to attract lawyers, bankers and successful businesspeople?

Again point taken, but I am not sure that a nurse has the appropriate skills for making decisions about things like economic policy, foreign policy, defence, etc... I think there is a very good case for having a nurse being responsible for the NHS, as long as they were able to manage the budget effectively. I still think the salary would have to be good to get somebody competent and willing to take the responsibility. A random person from a random 'normal' job would probably run a mile if offered a job as an MP.

Run a mile if offered a job as an MP! We all know thats not how it works don't we. Most 'working' MP's start off the career at local level, hopefully learning thier stock in trade and, like most 'normal' jobs start to climb the greasy pole of promotion. The difference is of course the politician needs to be elected. Note the number of MP's who have ran the guantlet by starting off as an union shop steward.

[skoff]

crankedup said:

skoff said:

crankedup said:

You have to pay huge amounts of money to attract top talent!! utter piffle. The same old clap trap bankers used to use to line thier pockets. If people want to work in politics then do the same as the general population of this Country, decide, look at salary structure, if you still feel you have the burning desire go for it. We need to get away from this 'top people, top money' nonsense and return to some ethics and honesty again.

Point taken about the bankers, but that was more down to poor recruitment of people for the job with no qualifications or relevant experience.

I don't see how talent can be attracted any other way than with good salary. In a utopian society then yes we would have honest selfless people running the country, but the trouble is there are many many commercial organisations only too happy to pay big £££s to get successful people on board with a proven track record - how do you compete with that other than with comparable salaries?

But I see the counter to my argument as 'old money', do we not have to wake up and realize that the big money is no longer going to be out there. Well OK, some top private Companies might still survive on 'old money' thinking but in truth those days are gone. Don't get me wrong here, people who have brushes in thier tool cabinet will still be paid less than somebody with an leather attache case with tools of the desk in it, I just feel that the difference will be significantly reduced over the next decade.

Ah ok I think I see where you are coming from now. I too think that the big wages currently being paid are too high, and I think that company survival will force them down... I just think that MPs wages should be comparable to the equivalent private sector top dogs. If nothing else to increase the competition for those people wanting to take up public office.

[skoff]

crankedup said:

skoff said:

ipitythefool said:

skoff said:

[I don't see how talent can be attracted any other way than with good salary.

Define talent.

Why can't a nurse become an MP? Why do you have to attract lawyers, bankers and successful businesspeople?

Again point taken, but I am not sure that a nurse has the appropriate skills for making decisions about things like economic policy, foreign policy, defence, etc... I think there is a very good case for having a nurse being responsible for the NHS, as long as they were able to manage the budget effectively. I still think the salary would have to be good to get somebody competent and willing to take the responsibility. A random person from a random 'normal' job would probably run a mile if offered a job as an MP.

Run a mile if offered a job as an MP! We all know thats not how it works don't we. Most 'working' MP's start off the career at local level, hopefully learning thier stock in trade and, like most 'normal' jobs start to climb the greasy pole of promotion. The difference is of course the politician needs to be elected. Note the number of MP's who have ran the guantlet by starting off as an union shop steward.

True enough, but it doesn't make it right... We are currently getting experienced MPs - but the experience they have is experience as a politician and, as you say, getting voted in. Maybe that's the part of the system that doesn't work? The old adage about those that most want to lead should be the ones that under no circumstances be allowed to... But that's a different thread.

The question you answered is 'why can't a nurse become and MP' - well that's because she needs to have played the political game to get elected. It's a corrupt system, but I still think we need to up the rewards to increase the competition for the top jobs.

[Skywalker]

Regarding salaries - MPs should have their salary linked to a number of public sector jobs.

Say...20% of it linked to a civil serpent's; 20% to a teacher's; 20% to a nurse's; 20% to a soldier's and the final fifth linked to a given profession. It would reflect those who's salaries they control and take them away from being a special case.

Committee chairpersons & cabinet ministers could have a pay grade linked to the same professions but at a higher level.

Accomodation should be state owned & maintained furnished flats / appartments.

Other expenses recompensed on the production of receipts upto a certain value.

They could also be issued rail warrants like the military for travel.

PS: Eric did make a tt of himself. He ended up making himself look like a sleazy buffoon. Charles Clarke must have chuckled all evening long.

Edited by Skywalker on Friday 27th March 17:16

[crankedup]

Its all interesting stuff and broadly speaking we are all saying the system needs changing, or a good rub down at least

[elster]

ipitythefool said:

I laugh when I hear people who work 35 hour weeks complaining about MP's perks.

The average MP will work nearly 100 hours a week, and be on call 24hrs a day 7 days a week even when they're on holiday.

Well I can only think of front benchers doing 100 hours a week, at a push. I believe that Jack Straw does a sum total of bugger all hours about 50 in a usual working week. Obviously when trekking around the world he will be spending a bit more hours.

If you are going on that basis their PA's should be on ten times their salary.

Oh and I would think most of PH work full time, not 35 hours a week.

[spaximus]

What they should do is buy a block of flats in the most run down area of London and house them all there. I suspect then thr residents in those areas would see a benefit from imporoved service and police attention.

Eric Pickles was so far in the hole he dug it was really a mine shaft!

[hornet]

How big is the Olympic Village at Stratford going to be and what are we planning to do with it after we've buggered up the Olympics? Stick the lot of them in that.