Have just being reading the comments section in this article and I can’t make my mind up, I found myself agreeing with them all both those for and against lol
What’s your thoughts, should MPs have second jobs?
I find it hard to believe it`s classed as a job in the first place tbh.
A house full of wittering people who shout over each other and never keep their promises to those who vote them in.
I suppose the second job could be to put right what you mucked up in the first place,that would take HOURS of work.
I don’t mind if some of these articles have second jobs. Provided they are carried out in their own time. Weekends and evenings etc. But not at any time, they are very well paid to do work for their constituents.
Hi. See my thread entitled “Brown / Starmer constitional plans” please. This issue of second jobs is just one of a range of measures proposed by the Brown authored and Starmer instigated plan. I’m happy that you also raise this point. I think it needs raised.
And to be honest I’m not surprised you missed my thread. The input from others has been far from over-whelming. That’s ok by me. But one the primary aims of the Brown paper is to recover the credibility of parliament and politicians. Removing second jobs is just one of the proposals in this paper. Others are more significant. And the lack of credibility of politicians (from so many comments on this forum) seems to be a key issue today. Yet so few people seem to be interested in this Brown/Starmer paper which is trying to address this problem. What’s going on? Is it that we want to moan but can’t be bothered to find solutions?