Mhairi Black's already broken protocol on the first day

[AndrewEH1]

Bluebarge said:

Andy Zarse said:

Yes, she even kept a straight face when delivering a speech railing against political opportunism and tactical voting, then trotted off to be instructed by Surgeon to vote against hunting in England...

Doubt she would have needed instructing on that issue - not many left-wing 20 year olds are in favour of relaxing the fox hunting ban.

The vote on fox hunting was a 'free vote', therefore MPs were to vote without being whipped, there were a number of Con MPs who were going to vote against relaxing the fox hunting ban.

Edited by AndrewEH1 on Wednesday 15th July 10:12

[Andy Zarse]

Bluebarge said:

Andy Zarse said:

Yes, she even kept a straight face when delivering a speech railing against political opportunism and tactical voting, then trotted off to be instructed by Surgeon to vote against hunting in England...

Doubt she would have needed instructing on that issue - not many left-wing 20 year olds are in favour of relaxing the fox hunting ban.

Not the point. My point was the irony and dishonesty of her speech when compared to her actions. English hunting has absolutely nothing to do with Scottish MPs.

[BrabusMog]

Andy Zarse said:

Bluebarge said:

Andy Zarse said:

Yes, she even kept a straight face when delivering a speech railing against political opportunism and tactical voting, then trotted off to be instructed by Surgeon to vote against hunting in England...

Doubt she would have needed instructing on that issue - not many left-wing 20 year olds are in favour of relaxing the fox hunting ban.

Not the point. My point was the irony and dishonesty of her speech when compared to her actions. English hunting has absolutely nothing to do with Scottish MPs.

Well after the student fees fiasco, are you really that surprised?

[AndrewEH1]

Andy Zarse said:

Not the point. My point was the irony and dishonesty of her speech when compared to her actions. English hunting has absolutely nothing to do with Scottish MPs.

No but as a country, the UK if you had forgotten, allowing fox hunting in 2015 is completely morally abhorrent. If an extra 56 votes against (if they are all against fox hunting of course) it can help stop it then this is one of the rare times Scottish (and Northern Irish) votes should be used for English (& Wales?) only laws.

Edited by AndrewEH1 on Wednesday 15th July 10:19

[Hugo a Gogo]

Andy Zarse said:

Bluebarge said:

Andy Zarse said:

Yes, she even kept a straight face when delivering a speech railing against political opportunism and tactical voting, then trotted off to be instructed by Surgeon to vote against hunting in England...

Doubt she would have needed instructing on that issue - not many left-wing 20 year olds are in favour of relaxing the fox hunting ban.

Not the point. My point was the irony and dishonesty of her speech when compared to her actions. English hunting has absolutely nothing to do with Scottish MPs.

as much as it does with London MPs or Manchester MPs, no-one hunts down Oxford Street do they?

all MPs vote for issues affecting the nation, and the vote said the UK is still one nation

[Agrispeed]

AndrewEH1 said:

Andy Zarse said:

Not the point. My point was the irony and dishonesty of her speech when compared to her actions. English hunting has absolutely nothing to do with Scottish MPs.

No but as a country, the UK if you had forgotten, allowing fox hunting in 2015 is completely morally abhorrent. If an extra 56 votes against (if they are all against fox hunting of course) it can help stop it then this is one of the rare times Scottish (and Northern Irish) votes should be used for English (& Wales?) only laws.

Edited by AndrewEH1 on Wednesday 15th July 10:19

The vote is for an amendment on the current law to change it to the same as the Scottish law.

[oyster]

AndrewEH1 said:

Andy Zarse said:

Not the point. My point was the irony and dishonesty of her speech when compared to her actions. English hunting has absolutely nothing to do with Scottish MPs.

No but as a country, the UK if you had forgotten, allowing fox hunting in 2015 is completely morally abhorrent. If an extra 56 votes against (if they are all against fox hunting of course) it can help stop it then this is one of the rare times Scottish (and Northern Irish) votes should be used for English (& Wales?) only laws.

Edited by AndrewEH1 on Wednesday 15th July 10:19

This has nothing to do with cuddly foxes and all to do with pushing the Tories to offer a 2nd independence referendum.

[Andy Zarse]

AndrewEH1 said:

Andy Zarse said:

Not the point. My point was the irony and dishonesty of her speech when compared to her actions. English hunting has absolutely nothing to do with Scottish MPs.

No but as a country, the UK if you had forgotten, allowing fox hunting in 2015 is completely morally abhorrent. If an extra 56 votes against (if they are all against fox hunting of course) it can help stop it then this is one of the rare times Scottish (and Northern Irish) votes should be used for English (& Wales?) only laws.

Err I reckon you're being deliberately naïve here. What on earth has hunting got to do with this?

[matchmaker]

Hol said:

All parties have people paid to write and edit speeches?

Knowing people would be looking at this one, I would estimate a LOT of backroom people contributed to its editing.

She does have a first class honours degree in Politics and Public Policy.

[Otispunkmeyer]

BrabusMog said:

I still don't understand what experience a 20 year old can bring to the table for their constituency. Decent enough speach, would have been better if she could stand still.

same level of experience as the rest of them. i.e. none (of the real world).

[Bluebarge]

Otispunkmeyer said:

BrabusMog said:

I still don't understand what experience a 20 year old can bring to the table for their constituency. Decent enough speach, would have been better if she could stand still.

same level of experience as the rest of them. i.e. none (of the real world).

Ok, so what's "the real world"?

I expect the PH stock response would be "running a business" but, as someone who runs one himself, my experience is that most people in work know their own little sphere very well but are often ignorant of what large sections of the business world, let alone other spheres, are up to.

So, what exactly would qualify you to make policy on: social policy; defence, health, international relations; science policy; energy, environment, pensions etc, etc? because those are the skills an MP could be said to need.

[IainT]

doogz said:

Perhaps having worked in that industry in some capacity?

Our current Secretary of State for Health has a degree in Philosophy, Politics and Economics. No doubt as a cabinet minister, and as SSH, a knowledge of politics and economics is going to be useful.

But don't you think that maybe someone that's worked in healthcare in some professional capacity might be better placed to make decisions?

Like all management the key is to have advisors of sufficient quality in the spheres that are required and to use you intellect and experience to balance their views to reach the best possible decision. e.g. weight desired political, health care and financial requirements. that plus managing the ego's in your team, the press, your wife, children, mistress(es) (or whatever the male equivalent is)... Then there's carrying the flag for your department to maintain budget and head count. Preparing long-term plans. Seeking to address key party manifesto pledges.

Good senior management is rarely about doing or knowing the minutiae of the issues but about keeping the team going forwards while keeping an eye on all the competing requirements.

[Bluebarge]

doogz said:

Bluebarge said:

Ok, so what's "the real world"?

I expect the PH stock response would be "running a business" but, as someone who runs one himself, my experience is that most people in work know their own little sphere very well but are often ignorant of what large sections of the business world, let alone other spheres, are up to.

So, what exactly would qualify you to make policy on: social policy; defence, health, international relations; science policy; energy, environment, pensions etc, etc? because those are the skills an MP could be said to need.

Perhaps having worked in that industry in some capacity?

Our current Secretary of State for Health has a degree in Philosophy, Politics and Economics. No doubt as a cabinet minister, and as SSH, a knowledge of politics and economics is going to be useful.

But don't you think that maybe someone that's worked in healthcare in some professional capacity might be better placed to make decisions?

Not necessarily. Sometimes people are too close to the coalface and can't see the bigger picture. After all, no-one has experience of running the NHS until they have....run the NHS. The Civil Servants in the Department (who don't change every 5 years or sooner) are there to provide the expertise, the politicians are there to provide the direction.

Which was rather my point - MPs are required to do such a diverse job that nothing could really prepare you for that other than running a very large council. Personally, I'm quite happy there is a 20 y.o. MP, no-one else is really able to empathise with voters of her generation in quite the same way and she may be able to inspire some uninterested youngsters to take an interest in politics in a way no 40-something, identikit, party-whipped politician ever could.

[fluffnik]

Bluebarge said:

Doubt she would have needed instructing on that issue - not many left-wing 20 year olds are in favour of relaxing the fox hunting ban.

Not many English either...

[fluffnik]

Andy Zarse said:

Not the point. My point was the irony and dishonesty of her speech when compared to her actions. English hunting has absolutely nothing to do with Scottish MPs.

Thanks to the Brits persuading/conning the Scots into remaining under the colonial yoke, there are only British MPs at Westminster.

You can't have it both ways.

[fluffnik]

oyster said:

This has nothing to do with cuddly foxes and all to do with pushing the Tories to offer a 2nd independence referendum.

There's bits of both along with a large dash of being an effective and progressive opposition to a Tory government for whom only 24% of the electorate voted.

(The SNP have supported proportional representation for a long time, and continue to do so, even though it would cost them Westminster seats.)

[Andy Zarse]

fluffnik said:

You can't have it both ways.

You do if you're Scottish!

[Greedydog]

fluffnik said:

Thanks to the Brits persuading/conning the Scots into remaining under the colonial yoke, there are only British MPs at Westminster.

You can't have it both ways.

There was only one side conning anyone and it wasn't the No Campaign. Do you really think so little of your fellow citizens as to think they were fooled by the 'Brits'?

[BrabusMog]

Andy Zarse said:

fluffnik said:

You can't have it both ways.

You do if you're Scottish!

[gofasterrosssco]

fluffnik said:

oyster said:

This has nothing to do with cuddly foxes and all to do with pushing the Tories to offer a 2nd independence referendum.

There's bits of both along with a large dash of being an effective and progressive opposition to a Tory government for whom only 24% of the electorate voted.

(The SNP have supported proportional representation for a long time, and continue to do so, even though it would cost them Westminster seats.)

What, for a Bill that was scuppered by a party with what, maybe 3% of the popular vote..?