Jump to content

Who is the Honest Politician?


Guest Peter James

Recommended Posts

Guest pelmetman

Seeing as there's 650 of them ;-) .............the law of averages for politicians, dictates that at least one should be honest :D ......

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pelmetman - 2015-02-23 3:35 PM

 

Seeing as there's 650 of them ;-) .............the law of averages for politicians, dictates that at least one should be honest :D ......

 

 

1/650th not very good, mind you how often do they get ALL in the chamber?

Should be paid on attendance only! Clock in and out !!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PJay - 2015-02-23 4:18 PM

 

pelmetman - 2015-02-23 3:35 PM

 

Seeing as there's 650 of them ;-) .............the law of averages for politicians, dictates that at least one should be honest :D ......

 

 

1/650th not very good, mind you how often do they get ALL in the chamber?

Should be paid on attendance only! Clock in and out !!

 

That's what they do Pauline, sign in....make a bow to the squeaker.....hang around for a few minutes then sign out and round to Soho for some relaxation too help them wind down. ;-)

 

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PJay - 2015-02-23 4:18 PM

 

pelmetman - 2015-02-23 3:35 PM

 

Seeing as there's 650 of them ;-) .............the law of averages for politicians, dictates that at least one should be honest :D ......

 

 

1/650th not very good, mind you how often do they get ALL in the chamber?

Should be paid on attendance only! Clock in and out !!

 

 

 

If you ever watch prime ministers question time at midday on Wednesdays you will see that the LAST place we want them all to be is in the chamber.

 

;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Some wry comments on politicians:-

 

 

Politicians and nappies should be changed frequently and all for the same reason.

 

When I was a boy I was told that anybody could become a politician; I'm beginning to believe it.

 

Instead of giving a politician the keys to the city, it might be better to change the locks.

 

Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.

 

Democracy is being allowed to vote for the candidate you dislike least.

 

We'd all like to vote for the best man, but he's never a candidate.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 out of 12 - is shockingly bad but sadly probably not a surprise to most of the public.

 

It does seem increasingly that there a lot of MPS who seem to be in it for themselves - and have forgotten that they are public servants. For some it seems a good way of developing a high profile which can then be put to personal gain when they release their novel, or pursue a reality TV / media career. And obviously while they're a sitting MP if they can earn money on the side whilst claiming generous expenses all the better.

 

I think I read somewhere that at the time of the expenses scandal Cameron remarked that the next big scandal would be this idea of paid lobbying / consultancy.

 

I agree that an MP should if possible keep one foot in the real world, so maybe we need some legislation that would allow them to continue on a part-time basis in their previous job. Obviously this only works for those MPS who have had a real job and not gone straight from Oxford/Cambridge to work as a 'researcher / aide/ for their party - which looks increasingly common.

 

So if someone was a lawyer, doctor, accountant whatever then continuing in that role could have advantages. However this idea of consultancy in the area in which they have government experience/potential influence is wide-open to abuse and raises the question of what the MP is being paid for, and whether undemocratic influence in terms of framing legislation etc. is being bought.

 

All thats happened is that these interests - whatever they might be have to be declared in the 'Regeister of Interests' - and that means its 'transparent'. So thats Ok then - It doesnt get to the heart of the issue though - which is they are the elected representatives of their constituents, not a consultant for a private health company, tobacco company, etc. etc.

 

Perhaps every time an MP of any persuasion raises an issue in the press etc. these interests should be published too then we could see why they are so keen on this particular 'reform'.

 

Its hardly surprising so many people are disillusioned with the system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're all in together,

 

a politician who charges the same for an afternoon talk,

 

that a couple on basic state pension receive for a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I see it primarily as media mischief making sensationalism creating yet another mountain out of a molehill because it sells newspapers and TV programmes.

 

If any person, including an MP, has experiences and contacts that he can profit from I do not see anything wrong in that as long as it damages nobody else, does not affect the national interest, and it does not detract from the duties required to satisfactorily fulfill their occupation as an MP.

 

Didn't it used to be called networking, or does that only apply to non MPs?

 

Most MPs have a team of assistants who are generally quite capable of taking care of many of the constituency responsibilities on the Mp's behalf at least some of the time.

 

We unfortunately live in a time of jealousy and political correctness - he's got more than me syndrome - where any kind of initiative is denigrated by some of those unable to benefit from it themselves?

 

Good luck to both Malcolm Rifkind and Jack Straw and I suppose we should be grateful that at least no political bias was shown in picking on one from each major party!

 

Just a personal view of course!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Peter James

Both will have had access to top secret information, people who can award overpriced Government Contracts etc.

What do you think people want to pay them so much money for?

What would you think of it if you had been passed over for a lucrative taxpayer funded Government contract, despite making an offer which would have cost the taxpayer less?

Perhaps its their highly valued expertise in 'Security and Intelligence' (the Committee Rifkind chaired) in the way they were suckered into this well known old ruse without even checking out the Hong Kong Company existed, before taking them in to the House of Commons *-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest pelmetman
Peter James - 2015-02-24 3:00 PM

 

Both will have had access to top secret information,

 

 

I've had access to top secret information :-S ...........I even used to operate the secret stamp 8-) ..........

 

It was in very pretty shade of red :D .........

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nowtelse2do - 2015-02-24 9:40 PM

 

You don't mean the Weymouth Aire do you.........That went hush hush. :D :D

 

Dave

 

Have no fear the forum's very own very special special agent is sticking doggedly on the case and whilst you may think he is in Portugal he is really secretly undercover in deepest Dorset right now so you can be sure that he has the forum memberships best interests at heart.

 

Roger, Wilko and out.

 

Say no more, nudge nudge, wink wink!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Had Enough

Yes, it's all good fun isn't it. First we had Pelmet telling us that the council was in league with business and that the 'official' report was a sham. He claimed that he had this information from his brother-in-law of thirty years who is 'second in command of parking' at Weymouth.

 

He later realised that he'd been rather foolish in claiming this, which showed a council employee accusing his employer of dodgy dealing and being 'in league' with site owners.

 

As Peter so succinctly put it in that thread: "Dave Pelmet must be sh*tting himself now, I hope he's got his facts right".

 

But now that the thread's gone, Pelmet has completely changed his story and claimed that it was only he who made these claims, not his BIL. He also tells us that his BIL told him that the real reason was that the sub-structure of the car park was unsuitable.

 

So we now have Pelmetman telling us that he doesn't believe his BIL, a man he's known for thirty years. That's very odd!

 

So what is the truth? Is the BIL wrong? Is he telling Pelmet a tale he knows to be untrue, or is his reason true, but Pelmet, with his aversion to any kind of business operators, cannot bring himself to accept that the car park was unsuitable?

 

Either way, Pelmet's BIL won't be too pleased with either of Pelmet's versions. In the first he's accusing his employer of dodgy dealing and in the second Pelmet doesn't believe him!

 

I shall drop another email to the chair of planning. I'm sure you're all eager to know what's going on. ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest pelmetman
Had Enough - 2015-02-25 9:23 AM

 

Either way, Pelmet's BIL won't be too pleased with either of Pelmet's versions. In the first he's accusing his employer of dodgy dealing and in the second Pelmet doesn't believe him!

 

I shall drop another email to the chair of planning. I'm sure you're all eager to know what's going on. ;-)

 

Correction Frank...........It's you who is trying to put that spin on it *-) ............As I said my BIL fed me the "Official" line about the infrastructure being unsuitable........and he knows I didn't buy it ;-) ..........

 

It appears the head of planning is reluctant to give us his opinion I wonder why (?) ..........

 

Don't forget the email from Mathew Piles stating they were receiving intense lobbying from the caravan park owners, which is why it had to go to planning >:-)................the lack of aire indicates to me that strings have been pulled.........probably down at the local ProbeUs club ;-) ............

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Had Enough
pelmetman - 2015-02-25 9:50 AM

 

Had Enough - 2015-02-25 9:23 AM

 

Either way, Pelmet's BIL won't be too pleased with either of Pelmet's versions. In the first he's accusing his employer of dodgy dealing and in the second Pelmet doesn't believe him!

 

I shall drop another email to the chair of planning. I'm sure you're all eager to know what's going on. ;-)

 

Correction Frank...........It's you who is trying to put that spin on it *-) ............As I said my BIL fed me the "Official" line about the infrastructure being unsuitable........and he knows I didn't buy it ;-) ..........

 

It appears the head of planning is reluctant to give us his opinion I wonder why (?) ..........

 

Don't forget the email from Mathew Piles stating they were receiving intense lobbying from the caravan park owners, which is why it had to go to planning >:-)................the lack of aire indicates to me that strings have been pulled.........probably down at the local ProbeUs club ;-) ............

 

 

So you don't believe your own BIL? Or are you saying yet again that he knows the 'official' line to be untrue?

 

And what is the local 'ProbeUs' club and do you think that the Labour councilor who is chairman of the planning committee is a member of it?

 

What needs answering here is the accusation that you continually make, an accusation that you originally claimed came from your BIL, that the official report is a pack of lies.

 

No matter how you now twist and turn, I and others know exactly what you said in the original post and trying to convince us that we imagined it won't wash. As I said, if your conscience enables you to completely deny the truth, that's up to you.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RE: Weymouth Aire thread.

Just to "refresh" ,as to what- and how- Dave actually posted:

 

RE: Petition to get Aires in UK.

Posted: 14 February 11:45am

“The recent attempt to get an aire in Weymouth was halted by the local campsite owners kicking up a fuss *-) .............."

 

..and when it was questioned whether that was “actually true”, you responded-

 

Posted: 15 February 8:09am

“My info came from Weymouth car parks 2nd in charge......does that trump your opinion? ;-) ”

 

..you continued with-

 

Posted : 15 February 11:16am

“I’ve known the bloke 30+years.........he’s my BIL ....... :D

 

I can only assume you have lead a very sheltered life if you’ve never come across, councils and local businesses being in league with each other 8-) .....apparently the “official” line on why there won’t be an aire is because of a lack of infrastructure . *-) ......”

 

As I posted at the time, there seems very little in the way of ambiguity there.

You are clearly indicting that your BiL has informed you that;

a)It has been stopped by campsite owners "kicking up a fuss"

and

b)..however the "official" line is "lack of infrastructure"...

 

Now, either, none or both of those may be the real reasons...but Dave, don't try to make out that you weren't claiming to have insider info' on the subject...it's just embarrassing. :-S

 

(I happened to save the above whilst composing a previous post of mine, when it was obvious you were starting to backtrack on what you actually posted).

 

Edit to add: Shouldn't you two be out sunning yourselves..and making sandcastles on the beach etc?

(lol)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Had Enough
pepe63 - 2015-02-25 10:36 AM

 

Now, either, none or both of those may be the real reasons...but Dave, don't try to make out that you weren't claiming to have insider info' on the subject...it's just embarrassing. :-S

 

(I happened to save the above whilst composing a previous post of mine, when it was obvious you were starting to backtrack on what you actually posted).

 

Edit to add: Shouldn't you two be out sunning yourselves..and making sandcastles on the beach etc?

(lol)

 

I'm glad that someone else has a memory as well!

 

And as for the last sentence we're having a lazy morning. My wife is in the sun and I'm tidying the 'van and paying the odd bill online and answering emails, however....................

 

after lunch we're biking from our site across the marshes into the lovely old town of Tavira. The marshes are an ornithologists' paradise and a nice way to ride the few miles into town.

 

It's a hard life!

 

Tonight's toss up is whether to dine out or in. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest pelmetman
pepe63 - 2015-02-25 10:36 AM

 

 

Now, either, none or both of those may be the real reasons...but Dave, don't try to make out that you weren't claiming to have insider info' on the subject...it's just embarrassing. :-S

 

 

Nice to see your keeping your files on me up to date ;-) .............I'm not denying I have insider info :D ........I'm just correcting your HEro's spin *-) ...........

 

Clearly once HE has had an answer from the head of planning we'll know either way......wont we? >:-) ......

 

Although the head of planning doesn't appear to be in any rush to reply to Frank :-S ...............doesn't he know who HE is 8-) ................ (lol)

 

The lack of the aire points pretty clearly to strings being pulled *-)................Although I hope to be corrected B-) ..........

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

pelmetman - 2015-02-25 11:58 AM

 

pepe63 - 2015-02-25 10:36 AM

 

Now, either, none or both of those may be the real reasons...but Dave, don't try to make out that you weren't claiming to have insider info' on the subject...it's just embarrassing. :-S

 

........I'm just correcting your HEro's spin *-) ...........

 

 

You haven't "corrected" anybody...all you've done is squirm and backtrack on what you were clearly implying..Just have the b*lls to admit it...

 

..but if you are going to bullsh*t, to big yourself up, you'd better get yourself a better memory... ;-)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...