krugerandsmith Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 Opinions please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krugerandsmith Posted March 17, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 Opinions please folks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zapp Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 What's your opinion on the matter? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger-Mouse Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 I was just reading about this. It's ridiculous, how can he expect to fulfil his obligations as an MP and be effective in the other roles he has taken on? That's without even considering conflicts of interest and the possibility of him acting in Parliament on behalf of his other employers. If he wants a high paying job then I have no problems with that but he should stand down as an MP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisjpainter Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 I was just reading about this. It's ridiculous, how can he expect to fulfil his obligations as an MP and be effective in the other roles he has taken on? That's without even considering conflicts of interest and the possibility of him acting in Parliament on behalf of his other employers. If he wants a high paying job then I have no problems with that but he should stand down as an MP. Quite. It's not the 19th Century any more, people have the right to expect their MP to take their cause - and parliament - seriously. Being an MP should be more than a job and not something you mix with being an editor - or something you just up sticks and walk away from like Tristram Hunt and a few others. Makes my blood boil. No wonder people have lost respect for MP's when they treat the job with such contempt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
islandgun Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 (edited) Theres seven days in a week, and i believe he only has 6 jobs....... (i always liked him.. whats not to like ) Edited March 17, 2017 by islandgun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol p Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 You'll never stop them doing this. They influence you, convince you, then you vote them in and they'll bend everyone over. Politicians two aims are to kiss your backside and to lie to you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaymo Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 Fair play and 'why not' If he fulfils all of his obligations then I believe it's perfectly acceptable-- or do I detect a bit of the old 'green monster'? Your not seriously telling me that if you were offered additional money for not s great deal of work you wouldn't take it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisjpainter Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 Fair play and 'why not' If he fulfils all of his obligations then I believe it's perfectly acceptable-- or do I detect a bit of the old 'green monster'? Your not seriously telling me that if you were offered additional money for not s great deal of work you wouldn't take it? I'm saying he shouldn't have time to be able to accept. If you serve your constituents, you serve them wholeheartedly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wascal Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 Fair play and 'why not' If he fulfils all of his obligations then I believe it's perfectly acceptable-- or do I detect a bit of the old 'green monster'? Your not seriously telling me that if you were offered additional money for not s great deal of work you wouldn't take it? +1 He can have as many jobs as he likes If his constituents are not satisfied they vote him out , That's our system. If anyone thinks it should change , They could campaign for change or even stand for election themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger-Mouse Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 Fair play and 'why not' If he fulfils all of his obligations then I believe it's perfectly acceptable-- or do I detect a bit of the old 'green monster'? Your not seriously telling me that if you were offered additional money for not s great deal of work you wouldn't take it? As the Spartans once said . . . "If" No jealousy at all. If I worried about people who earned more than me, have nicer things etc etc I'd never get out of bed in a morning. I'm not a particularly materialistic person. As long as I can afford to pursue my hobbies, run a car and put food on the table I'm happy. True enough if someone offered me some easy money I'd take it but then again my job isn't in the public eye, I'm not a public servant. Sitting on a board of directors is maybe fair enough (barring conflicts of interests/ acting on their behalf in Parliament) but being the editor of a paper? I would expect that is quite a demanding job. If it isn't then he's probably not going to be a very good editor. The fact is he already earns a very nice salary by the standards of the people he represents (or is supposed to represent). If he has a genuine desire to be seen as a worthy politician then he should stick to doing what he's paid for because otherwise he just looks like another professional politician with his snout buried firmly in the trough. Compare him to someone like Jacob Rees Mogg who made a shed load of money before he entered Parliament and now focuses, as far as I can tell, almost solely on politics. As the man himself has been wont to say, he earned his money and now does his public service in the Roman way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12gauge82 Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 He doesn't surprise me, just another politician with their nose in the trough, nothing surprises me when it comes to politicians! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kyska Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 +1 He can have as many jobs as he likes If his constituents are not satisfied they vote him out , That's our system. If anyone thinks it should change , They could campaign for change or even stand for election themselves. I'm with this, I wasn't this morning, but I agree. If he can juggle glass balls let him do so. I know of lots of people who juggle high paid, high impact jobs and pull it off, my wife being one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billy. Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 If someone doesn't have a job, they get slated and if someone has three, they get slated. As long as he can do each job properly and not have each one affect the other, then good on him. Whether there's a conflict of interest is another matter, which I don't think OP was getting at, but he's gone quiet after his demanding start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger-Mouse Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 If someone doesn't have a job, they get slated and if someone has three, they get slated. As long as he can do each job properly and not have each one affect the other, then good on him. Whether there's a conflict of interest is another matter, which I don't think OP was getting at, but he's gone quiet after his demanding start. If you really think a company is paying George £500k plus solely for his intellectual input as a director then it would suggest you are rather naive. They're paying for either insider information or political influence in areas that interest them, or possibly just to gain a few government contracts. If George wants a second income then I wouldn't complain one bit if he did a few hours behind the bar of his local pub, connecting with his electorate. At least that would be honest work for honest money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kody Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 Option vile dispicable sub human moron that always picked on the disabled and the poor and low paid to save money rot in hell Osborne Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaymo Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 Option vile dispicable sub human moron that always picked on the disabled and the poor and low paid to save money rot in hell Osborne Whoa- don't hold back the fella Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KFC Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 Taxpayer funds someone on benefits and if they do any other work they get penalised and get their benefits means tested by a private company who profit from stopping benefits. The first thing that happens in a recession is benefits get reduced. Politicians get funded by the taxpayer to work for us plus an expense account equivalent to another income and they can have as many jobs as they like and earn as much as they like and during a recession their pay goes up. All in it together?? I should cocoa!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
four-wheel-drive Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 (edited) It just seems wrong to me that someone in his position as an MP and ex government member he is to involved and informed to be a newspaper editor if he wants to do that job then he should give up being an MP as for those people who say that it is up to his constituents if they think he can do both jobs then he should put himself up for realection and let them decided. Edited March 17, 2017 by four-wheel-drive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wandringstar Posted March 17, 2017 Report Share Posted March 17, 2017 (edited) Option vile dispicable sub human moron that always picked on the disabled and the poor and low paid to save money rot in hell Osborne stupid post, mods should remove it, its beneath the forum. Edited March 17, 2017 by wandringstar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger-Mouse Posted March 18, 2017 Report Share Posted March 18, 2017 stupid post, mods should remove it, its beneath the forum. Meh, it's an opinion that the poster is entitled to. As long as no rules are broken then opinions should be allowed to be voiced, irrespective of whether they are stupid or not. Just watching yesterday's Daily Politics and they are suggesting there is a conflict of interests between his role as editor and his role at Black Rock, never mind his political office. Also saying that acting as editor is a job that requires 12 hours plus per day to do properly. If that is the case, and I have no reason to disbelieve Andrew Neil then Osbourne clearly can't be both an MP and an editor and devote enough time to do both roles successfully. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted March 18, 2017 Report Share Posted March 18, 2017 I really couldn't care less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peck Posted March 18, 2017 Report Share Posted March 18, 2017 GREEDY PIG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wb123 Posted March 18, 2017 Report Share Posted March 18, 2017 This is a very difficult area. I think most of us would want our politicians to represent a selection of society rather than being career politicians. I feel politics should be a field one can move into for a five year term and then be able to move back into normal work in order to encourage this. As such we must allow people to continue to work outside politics to keep their oar in. Or else no sane individual would take a one way trip into politics In Mr Osbournes case it is clear his various employers feel he can provide value for money and balance his commitments. So long as he declares his conflicts of interests, which clearly he has, i fail to see the issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol p Posted March 18, 2017 Report Share Posted March 18, 2017 I find it sad that while he can manage to hold down three jobs or more, one hundred years ago young men were greatful for one that gave with dignity a chance to show themselves to be patriotic and run towards certain death. If Gideon is standing at the cenotaph this November just think about that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.