Apparently Winchester MP Stephen Brine repeatedly claimed on the public Register of Members’ Interests that he’d been given the green-light to take a £1,600-a-month job with Sigma Pharmaceuticals by a Parliamentary watchdog, just months after quitting as a Public Health minister in March 2019.
This was not true, it seems. And the company was given a Covid-19 contract worth £100,000 subsequently. Did Brine act as a lobbyist? Both he and the firm deny it. But they would, wouldn’t they?
And with corruption in government at an all-time high, it seems unlikely that we’ll get the facts, whether they’re innocent or not.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Geoffrey Cox: he has a safe seat, so he felt perfectly comfortable taking a second job and treating his Parliamentary work as a hobby.
Suddenly proportional representation is looking like the wise choice after all – isn’t it, Britain?
Some might say the result of the 2011 referendum on whether to introduce proportional representation for Parliamentary elections in the UK was a dire warning of the corruption that we see in government today. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.
The bid to introduce a fairer voting system was resoundingly defeated by a 68 per cent of votes against to only 32 per cent for, on a turnout of 42 per cent of the electorate.
I wonder if the survivors of the other 58 per cent of registered voters at the time regret not bothering to turn up now they know that the result meant a continuation of “safe seats”, allowing the MPs who occupy them to corrupt themselves with second jobs with impunity.
“FPTP has clearly given some MPs a brass neck. The leadership of opp parties must accept the only way they can give the public a realistic opportunity of unseating the worst offenders is by working together to secure a fairer voting system,” #PRhttps://t.co/FG6M7zrj2v
You see, the current First Past The Post system lends itself to tribal voting, meaning that areas that traditionally vote for a particular party are likely to see that party’s representative into Parliament at every election, because there only needs to be enough of them to see off all the other contenders individually.
It means a minority of voters can impose their will – or, more realistically, the real plans behind the lies that their favoured party told to get elected – on the majority.
Do you think most of the UK wants the NHS carved up by a cabal of private corporations? Of course not – around 70 per cent of voters want full re-nationalisation. But that won’t stop the Tories taking it another step towards full privatisation – the exact opposite of what we want – on Tuesday.
By the same token, the individuals occupying those safe seats know that they’re unlikely to be voted out, so they know they can take second jobs and rake in the cash.
As the Guardian article states, the facts “undermine Boris Johnson’s suggestion that voters who disapprove of their MP’s outside work can simply unseat them at an election”.
Either that damned fool spoke without thinking (yet again), or he simply lied. Neither alternative is acceptable in a prime minister but – oh! He’s in a safe Tory seat! So you can’t vote him out.
You see how it works?
Pretty much all of the problems we have with our democracy today stem from the fact that in 2011 the UK voted not to have one.
Clive Lewis’s words (above) are absolutely true – but there is a fatal flaw.
The 2011 referendum was a once-in-a-lifetime situation, forced by the fact that the Tories had failed to win a majority in Parliament and a referendum was a condition of their coalition with the Liberal Democrats.
Now we live in a dictatorship where Boris Johnson lied his way to an 80-seat Conservative majority. Neither he nor any Tory who replaces him will ever allow another referendum because they know it would end the dictatorship they have lied so hard to achieve.
And we’re unlikely to see another hung Parliament for the foreseeable future because the main opposition party – Labour – is currently run by a red Tory wetwipe who probably couldn’t win an election if he was the only candidate.
Public opinion might push Johnson towards a gesture of some sort, but it won’t be much. He has already watered down plans to restrict MPs from holding second jobs.
And this week he can distract us all with the votes on the NHS and on asylum seekers.
Bread and circuses. It’s a tactic that has worked since Roman times – because you’re always going to fall for it. Or will you..?
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Owen Paterson with his (former?) boss, Peter Fitzgerald of Randox. It seems that, after being forced out of Parliament, Paterson has also “stepped back” from his consultancy work. Wouldn’t he need that job more, now?
The BBC is reporting that Owen Paterson, whose refusal to accept a month’s suspension as an MP after being found to have been using Parliamentary space and equipment to carry out his second job sparked a scandal… no longer has his second job.
Apparently he has “stepped back from his consultancy work, for which he was earning £100,000 a year on top of his £81,932 MP’s salary”.
Really?
But his former colleagues – like Andrew Rosindell – have been arguing that MPs are, really, hard-up and need these second jobs to survive (poor dears!) so wouldn’t Paterson now need his consultancy work even more?
Perhaps he needed it more than his employers needed him, after his removal from the Green Benches. So I have to ask: did he step back or was he simply dropped?
It has been argued – persuasively – that MPs are only hired by firms to represent their interests to the government. We have seen a wealth of evidence to this effect in the awarding of Covid-19-related business contracts.
Owen Paterson is no longer an MP. And suddenly he no longer has his second job.
Doesn’t this simply confirm what was argued? And shouldn’t the likes of Laura Kuenssberg admit it, rather than shrouding it with obscure verbiage?
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Marcus Rashford: he has done far more for the United Kingdom than Natalie Elphicke.
Natalie Elphicke should have learned to keep her opinions to herself after she tried to influence senior judges after her husband was convicted of sexual assault. Clearly she didn’t.
That breach of the MPs’ code of conduct resulted in a pathetic punishment – just one day’s suspension from Parliament. Clearly it wasn’t enough to teach her the lesson she needed to learn.
Earlier this year, she criticised Marcus Rashford – the footballer whose campaigning ensured that the poorest schoolchildren could avoid malnutrition by forcing the government to continue providing free school meals to them during school holidays at the height of the Covid-19 crisis.
After he missed a vital penalty in the Euro 2020 final, she said he should have focused on his football rather than “playing politics”.
What a hypocrite! It turns out that she is among the legion of Tory MPs who have a second job.
The Mirror has the story:
Natalie Elphicke earns almost £100 an hour as the chair of the New Homes Quality Board.
She was handed a one-off £12,000 in November 2020, and since January has been paid just under £700 per week for eight hours’ work, on top of her £81k job as an MP pic.twitter.com/FB8LcNuZdS
Ms Elphicke later apologised, saying: "I regret messaging privately a rash reaction about Marcus Rashford's missed penalty and apologise to him for any suggestion that he is not fully focussed on his football." pic.twitter.com/DtbkU3bBKz
Perhaps Ms Elphicke was distracted from her responsibilities as an MP by the demands of her own second job?
In any case, since she is clearly averse to the idea of people having occupations that distract them from their main work – and therefore must disagree with the Tory claim that it brings a “richness” to their Parliamentary experience…
Will she be resigning her £100-an-hour second job any time soon?
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Good point, that. He said he could live on £53 a week – talking the talk.
But he’s got a second job worth £25,000 per year. So he doesn’t walk the walk. What a surprise.
And guess what?
Ian Duncan-Smith chaired a task force that recommended approving non-alcohol based hand sanitizer in the UK, but he "forgot to mention" that he's employed by the main supplier of the said product to the NHS.https://t.co/l1uFiK6dwx
That’s probably even more corrupt than Owen Paterson.
So why isn’t the man we call RTU (Return To Unit) being Returned To his family Unit (they always quit saying they’re spending more time with their family), never to return?
Is it because the Tory media have decided that Owen Paterson was the sacrificial lamb and now the Tories have “suffered enough” (another media claim)?
Or is it because his “broader experience” in selling non-alcoholic hand sanitiser to the government of which he has been a member is supposed to benefit the nation – as Sajid Javid’s roles advising banking giant JP Morgan and artificial intelligence firm C3.ai benefited the nation because it gave him broader experience?
Hilarious. Sajid Javid arguing that his "external interests" may not benefit his Bromsgrove constituents, but the nation benefits when MPs have broader experience. When it suits them they argue from the national perspective; when it doesn't, they say it's a constituency matter.
But, but, but… Javid only advised these outside organisations on matters in which he already has knowledge and experience (although not very much in the case of banking; he’s allegedly one of the damned fools behind the Great Recession of 2008 or thereabouts).
The nation would be better-off without him getting in the works and stinking them up, wouldn’t it?
All in all, Skwawkbox’s suggestion seems wise:
Here's an idea: ban second jobs, keep MPs' salary where it is – and any MP who isn't happy can resign his/her seat and go find another job while people genuinely interested in serving their constituents stand instead… pic.twitter.com/ZpQ3VfwTD6
And it’s not because of any flannel about helping the government with outside expertise.
It is simply because they are all on the take. They should all be in prison, not on the Green Benches.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Keir Starmer: he’s been on the Westminster second-job gravy train (albeit not in a big way) so he can’t criticise Tories who’ve done the same.
The public may be furious about Tory MPs who took lucrative second jobs representing big businesses when they should have been representing their constituents – but what help will they get from the Opposition?
None, it seems – because Labour leader Keir Starmer himself has taken second jobs.
In 2016, he worked for law firm Mishcon de Reya, declaring £4,500 in income for advising its academy between June 1 and September 30 that year.
But after joining the shadow cabinet as shadow Brexit Secretary that October, his application to return to work for the firm was vetoed by then-leader Jeremy Corbyn, and there was a good reason he should have done so.
Mishcon de Reya had represented Gina Miller when she challenged the authority of the UK’s Tory government to use delegated powers to invoke Article 50 of the European Union treaty to exit the bloc (she said – rightly – that only Parliament could remove rights that Parliament had granted).
When he became shadow Brexit secretary, Starmer became privy to information that could have created a conflict of interest between his work as a shadow Cabinet member and his second job.
I’m astonished to find myself in agreement with James Cleverly on this:
Starmer has since declared further income from employment outside Parliament.
Starmtroopers piling into my replies to lie that Starmer didn't do a load of moonlighting legal consultancy work when he was on a six figure ministerial salary as Labour's shadow Brexit minister.
Why's he admitted this second-jobbing work on the register of MPs interests then? pic.twitter.com/Tcm0JjsUuq
He clearly not only approves of MPs having second jobs but has actively engaged in the activity himself – so he cannot credibly oppose the practice.
There are other reasons to be concerned about Starmer’s connection with Mishcon de Reya. It’s apparently the apartheid state of Israel’s favourite UK law firm…
It appears that Mishcon de Reya also acted on behalf of ex-Labour staffers who later sued the party! https://t.co/QNtcUl6PXR
… and it represented people involved in the controversy over the way Labour handled allegations of anti-Semitism against its members.
When these people sued Labour, Starmer caved in and paid them six-figure sums, even though he had been advised that Labour would win.
Keir Starmer is currently sitting on the report of the Forde Inquiry, that examined claims made about the behaviour of many of those involved in this controversy.
What a tangled web we weave!
It seems that, not only does the scandal over Tory MPs’ second jobs give us reason to believe Starmer would not pursue the matter with the necessary (forensic?) diligence…
It also suggests a conflict of interest that means Starmer should never have had anything to do with the Forde Inquiry or any part of Labour’s investigations into anti-Semitism.
He never declared it. Who knows how many Labour members have suffered injustice as a result?
Is this apparent corruption enough reason to demand Starmer’s resignation?
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Gordon Brown: this is apparently the only image of him in the Vox Political archive – and is about as clear as Martha Kearney’s perception of him.
Here’s more evidence that the BBC is heavily Tory-influenced – and now we can mark down Martha Kearney as a Tory/Establishment mouthpiece, if we hadn’t already done so.
Former New Labour prime minister Gordon Brown appeared on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme this morning (November 10), where he made the following statement:
Gordon Brown says using a public office for private gain "should be banned outright" He names 3 issues: – conflict of interests – appts to Lords – foreign money in UK politics
"All must be addressed … otherwise this will be a parliament increasingly identified with sleaze"
Here is the correct interpretation of that incident:
Martha Kearney making the mistake of accusing Gordon Brown of making moonlighting money when he was an MP. He gave the lot to charity. This is *not* balance it’s indiscriminate smearing.
Yes indeed; she was trying to smear an honest man – and (even though he wasn’t a proper socialist) a better prime minister than anybody we’ve had since.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Geoffrey Cox: he has a rich, booming voice. One wonders whether we will hear it raised in his defence… and one finds it doubtful.
If the people of North Shropshire had good reason to reject Owen Paterson for using his Parliamentary office for outside work, what about the electors of Torridge and West Devon?
Their MP – the former Attorney General, Sir Geoffrey Cox – has been found using his office for work centred not just outside Parliament, but outside the United Kingdom altogether.
It seems he has been acting as a legal advisor to an inquiry by the government of the British Virgin Islands into – ironically – alleged government corruption.
This work seems to have involved at least two journeys to those paradisical Caribbean islands, in April and June this year.
So it seems reasonable for people in Torridge and West Devon to ask whether their MP carries out any work for them at all.
Coming after the scandal over Owen Paterson’s work for Randox, it amplifies fears that Conservative MPs with second jobs are occupied far more with them than with their first duty – to represent the people of their constituencies.
Cox has been paid more than £700,000 for his BVI work – a vastly higher amount than the £82,000 he gets as an MP.
Labour has demanded an inquiry by the Parliamentary standards commissioner based, it seems, on evidence that Cox used his publicly-funded Parliamentary office to carry out some aspects of his privately-funded second job.
The situation has attracted the usual level of British humour – with its usual barb of satire:
Understand that Boris Johnson opened a fridge this morning – not clear whether he was getting food or hiding
The comment by “Luke” refers to an incident in which Boris Johnson hid in a fridge to avoid being questioned on a difficult subject by members of the press.
It represents an expectation by the general public that our excuse for a prime minister would rather run away from the evidence of wrong-doing by his Parliamentarians than deal with it.
This is bolstered by the fact that Johnson himself stands accused of corrupt practices and may face further investigation (having already been found guilty of wrong-doing) by standards commissioner Kathryn Stone in the near future.
And she is not likely to handle it with a light touch, after he tried to force her to resign last week.
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Backhander: if Tories are taking money from corporates, who do you think they are representing in Parliament? It isn’t you!
It doesn’t matter which side won the Parliamentary debate on whether having a second job is a mark of corruption in a member of Parliament – or whether they should be paid more, so they don’t need(?) another job.
The public decision has already been made.
So Peter Bottomley’s miserable pleading that £81,000 per year isn’t enough and MPs should be paid more is easily dismissed – especially when most of the country is trying to exist on less than £18,000.
You are aware of the salary when you run for parliament, so don't start crying £81k isn't enough when there's people in work using Foodbanks.
Richard Burgon’s comment echoes one I made a few days ago: that companies don’t hire MPs to “advise” them – they hire MPs to represent their interests when plum contracts become available.
Senior Tories still think it is acceptable to speak in support of this attitude:
Tory MP reckons that MPs having second jobs ‘adds to the richness’ of Parliament.
I reckon MPs having second jobs adds only to the riches of MPs’ pockets.
I'd like to think Boris Johnson isn't attending the parliamentary standards debate because he's too ashamed to show his face. But the truth is he just can't be arsed.
In fact, he was in a hospital in Northumbria, making a potential contagion risk out of himself by wandering around without a face mask.
He was challenged on the subject of the Parliamentary debate! But he showed what an absolute and utter disgrace he is by refusing to answer it, point-blank:
This is a graphic example of the contempt in which the PM holds the public
Q. “Do you regret the huge error of judgement that saw you attempting to rewrite Parliamentary rules in favour of a friend & will you apologize to the public?”
Totally irresponsible: You can imagine Johnson’s excuse, though – “Er, er, they’re only northerners. I was trying to see how many I could contaminate in the shortest possible time. Haha!”
He’s totally irresponsible and a danger to everybody in the United Kingdom.
That was made abundantly clear when Boris Johnson elected to dodge the Parliamentary debate on MP corruption, pay and second jobs – to wander maskless through a hospital.
Look at this absolute scumbag, hiding away from the parliamentary debate on his government's corruption scandal, by hanging out maskless in a hospital.
Who on earth imagined that electing a bone-idle coward like this would turn out well? pic.twitter.com/hrJKcilLZ0
He, above all people, should know that nobody should go without a mask in an area where Covid-19 is likely to be found, caught, contracted. He fronted so many of the public information broadcasts about it.
Yet there he was – and you can see the photographic evidence for yourself.
What’s really amazing is the fact that he did this after contracting Covid-19, probably from visiting a hospital and shaking hands with the Covid patients who were there:
March 2020: “I went to a hospital and shook hands with everybody”
November 2021: “I went to a hospital and breathed over everybody”
It’s like a game of How Much Of A Shit Can He Not Give:
✅ Won’t wear a mask with a 78-year old President ✅ Won’t wear a mask with a 95-year old national treasure ✅ Won’t even wear a mask in a hospital pic.twitter.com/TJeOKbxwUl
Even more shocking is the fact that the minister Johnson’s government put up to do the morning media round actually made the following excuse for his non-attendance:
Anne-Marie Trevelyan suggests Boris Johnson probably won’t attend today’s debate on getting rid of sleaze from Parliament because "he has a very important job that only he can do.” #r4today
Er, no – he was doing the equivalent of his erstwhile hide-in-a-fridge routine.
Boris Johnson isn’t attending an emergency debate about his corruption, but he’ll travel back from COP26 to meet Telegraph journos and climate change deniers at the Garrick Club.
After the debacle of the last two years, won’t we all?
Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.
Vox Political needs your help! If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers) you can make a one-off donation here:
Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. This includes scrolling or continued navigation. more information
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.
