Join the Labour Party and save your country!

Jezyboy

Meh. Part of me thinks Labour could do a lot worse than listen to him.

ddraver

Indeed, I'm not doubting his mad skillz, just his writing... 😴

rjsterry

Pfft. If you want to see something funny, the apoplectic rage when someone screenshots his interminable blog, and his threats to ban the person in question from reading his blog if they don't properly link to it are quite something. He's so utterly desperate to be taken seriously.

rjsterry

Also funny are the diehard corbynites trying to leverage the Tory sleaze scandal to topple Starmer.

Pross

The way he uses the slang of a teen or twenty something always makes me laugh. He probably calls Singapore 'Singers'

Jezyboy

ddraver said:

Indeed, I'm not doubting his mad skillz, just his writing... 😴

Haha, and I was thinking it's much better than some of the previous stuff he's come out with!

Pross

What's the consensus on Stella Creasy and her battle to be allowed to take a baby into the Commons?

It seems a ludicrous demand to me, should people really be taking babies into the workplace at all? Can you imagine trying to have a meeting (or debating the laws of the country) with a load of babies that can start screaming at any moment.

webboo

Pross said:

What's the consensus on Stella Creasy and her battle to be allowed to take a baby into the Commons?

It seems a ludicrous demand to me, should people really be taking babies into the workplace at all? Can you imagine trying to have a meeting (or debating the laws of the country) with a load of babies that can start screaming at any moment.

Would it sound any different from Prime Ministers question time.

briantrumpet

webboo said:

Pross said:

What's the consensus on Stella Creasy and her battle to be allowed to take a baby into the Commons?

It seems a ludicrous demand to me, should people really be taking babies into the workplace at all? Can you imagine trying to have a meeting (or debating the laws of the country) with a load of babies that can start screaming at any moment.

Would it sound any different from Prime Ministers question time.

And more pleasant than one Nadine Dorries.

pangolin

Pross said:

What's the consensus on Stella Creasy and her battle to be allowed to take a baby into the Commons?

It seems a ludicrous demand to me, should people really be taking babies into the workplace at all? Can you imagine trying to have a meeting (or debating the laws of the country) with a load of babies that can start screaming at any moment.

People's kids or loud pets interrupting describes a lot of my meetings since March 2020.

tailwindhome

Pross said:

What's the consensus on Stella Creasy and her battle to be allowed to take a baby into the Commons?

It seems a ludicrous demand to me, should people really be taking babies into the workplace at all? Can you imagine trying to have a meeting (or debating the laws of the country) with a load of babies that can start screaming at any moment.

I think the battle isn't so much to be allowed to per se, but to have an alternative

TheBigBean

Pross said:

What's the consensus on Stella Creasy and her battle to be allowed to take a baby into the Commons?

It seems a ludicrous demand to me, should people really be taking babies into the workplace at all? Can you imagine trying to have a meeting (or debating the laws of the country) with a load of babies that can start screaming at any moment.

She's in a huff because she wasn't able to appoint a "locum MP" to do her full job whilst on maternity leave (she had funding for assistance), so her argument is that her constituents need representation and she can only do that with her baby in tow. Furthermore, all of this discourages mothers from parliament and removes diversity.

The counter argument is that there is a creche in the houses of parliament available for her use and probably subsidised. Many people in the country struggle on a daily basis with childcare and often on far lower salaries. Her position is similar to that of someone who is self-employed. Furthermore, she was elected by her constituents to represent them and not someone that she nominates. If she was sick she wouldn't be able to choose a sub either. Finally, it is about the presence of a baby rather than the effect on her of childbirth, so there is no reason that this issue shouldn't affect men equally.

Pross

briantrumpet said:

webboo said:

Pross said:

What's the consensus on Stella Creasy and her battle to be allowed to take a baby into the Commons?

It seems a ludicrous demand to me, should people really be taking babies into the workplace at all? Can you imagine trying to have a meeting (or debating the laws of the country) with a load of babies that can start screaming at any moment.

Would it sound any different from Prime Ministers question time.

And more pleasant than one Nadine Dorries.

You've upset the Nadine Dorries fanclub by the look of it!

briantrumpet

I've been flagged. Do we have a mystery Nadine Dorries supporter?

TheBigBean

Poor effort by her partner in any event.

Pross

Well she's somehow got them to have a committee look at it rather than be given the obvious answer of "don't be stupid, use childcare like every other working parent has to".

john80

The problem for MPs is that whilst there may be flexibility in the morning a lot of votes take place in the afternoon into evening. So either you make this electronic to prevent the requirement for attendance or you accept it is not a job for people with primary childcare responsibilities. Who takes their baby out the house when it should be in bed to vote repeatedly late at night. There is no easy answer to this but it should be obvious to all those seeking office that this is the deal for the job. The idea that you hire in a replacement for maternity is a bit of a joke really.

Jezyboy

Maybe if you sort at least some of the issues you'd get better MPs though?

Given at least a sizeable minority vote for a potential PM rather than their preferred local representative, the idea of a temporary replacement during maternity leave doesn't seem 100% nuts.

briantrumpet

Pross said:

briantrumpet said:

webboo said:

Pross said:

What's the consensus on Stella Creasy and her battle to be allowed to take a baby into the Commons?

It seems a ludicrous demand to me, should people really be taking babies into the workplace at all? Can you imagine trying to have a meeting (or debating the laws of the country) with a load of babies that can start screaming at any moment.

Would it sound any different from Prime Ministers question time.

And more pleasant than one Nadine Dorries.

You've upset the Nadine Dorries fanclub by the look of it!

Even for Cakestop's outer limits, I'm struggling to work out why anyone would be a fan. Though, by the way Dorries has been stalking James O'Brien, maybe she's on here too, under a pseudonym, looking for people who dare to criticise her (who are all misogynists, I believe).

Jezyboy

Pross said:

briantrumpet said:

webboo said:

Pross said:

What's the consensus on Stella Creasy and her battle to be allowed to take a baby into the Commons?

It seems a ludicrous demand to me, should people really be taking babies into the workplace at all? Can you imagine trying to have a meeting (or debating the laws of the country) with a load of babies that can start screaming at any moment.

Would it sound any different from Prime Ministers question time.

And more pleasant than one Nadine Dorries.

You've upset the Nadine Dorries fanclub by the look of it!

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/nadine-dorries-channel-4-public-service-broadcaster-302429/

She certainly seems to know her brief as well as a baby might be expected to.

TheBigBean

Jezyboy said:

Maybe if you sort at least some of the issues you'd get better MPs though?

Given at least a sizeable minority vote for a potential PM rather than their preferred local representative, the idea of a temporary replacement during maternity leave doesn't seem 100% nuts.

There is a widespread view that MPs are employees, so should have the rights of employees as well as the disadvantages e.g. no second jobs. This isn't really their status which is much more like someone who is self-employed.

I accept the argument that if someone is sick or away on parental leave, their constituents are not represented, but I'm not sure that hiring someone else to do the job works. How does that person vote? Based on what they think, based on how they think the MP on leave would have voted or do they consult the MP on leave to find out how they should vote? The latter case would be better solved by proxy votes.

For what it is worth, self-employed people, such as me, don't get parental leave. If she was fighting for better rights for all, then I would have some sympathy, but she is fighting for better rights for a very small number of people, so given that she could, like many other people, make it work, I'm not that sympathetic.

Most people don't have creches in their work place. She is very lucky to have that even if the obvious solution that perhaps the dad could help out is seemingly not available.

briantrumpet

Jezyboy said:

Pross said:

briantrumpet said:

webboo said:

Pross said:

What's the consensus on Stella Creasy and her battle to be allowed to take a baby into the Commons?

It seems a ludicrous demand to me, should people really be taking babies into the workplace at all? Can you imagine trying to have a meeting (or debating the laws of the country) with a load of babies that can start screaming at any moment.

Would it sound any different from Prime Ministers question time.

And more pleasant than one Nadine Dorries.

You've upset the Nadine Dorries fanclub by the look of it!

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/nadine-dorries-channel-4-public-service-broadcaster-302429/

She certainly seems to know her brief as well as a baby might be expected to.

Careful. The NDFC will be flagging you...

briantrumpet

I'm really not quite sure why Dorries has such a crush on JoB. But she does seem to be obsessed.

https://twitter.com/mrjamesob/status/1463527651692404739

briantrumpet

Maybe I'm getting obsessed with her though...

"And..So..Though its..Yeah and..That.." What a sharp mind.

https://twitter.com/ukiswitheu/status/1463456731757887488

rjsterry

TheBigBean said:

Jezyboy said:

Maybe if you sort at least some of the issues you'd get better MPs though?

Given at least a sizeable minority vote for a potential PM rather than their preferred local representative, the idea of a temporary replacement during maternity leave doesn't seem 100% nuts.

There is a widespread view that MPs are employees, so should have the rights of employees as well as the disadvantages e.g. no second jobs. This isn't really their status which is much more like someone who is self-employed.

I accept the argument that if someone is sick or away on parental leave, their constituents are not represented, but I'm not sure that hiring someone else to do the job works. How does that person vote? Based on what they think, based on how they think the MP on leave would have voted or do they consult the MP on leave to find out how they should vote? The latter case would be better solved by proxy votes.

For what it is worth, self-employed people, such as me, don't get parental leave. If she was fighting for better rights for all, then I would have some sympathy, but she is fighting for better rights for a very small number of people, so given that she could, like many other people, make it work, I'm not that sympathetic.

Most people don't have creches in their work place. She is very lucky to have that even if the obvious solution that perhaps the dad could help out is seemingly not available.

Wife got a (very) basic minimum maternity allowance and is self employed. Not sure if this is available for fathers.

https://www.gov.uk/maternity-allowance/eligibility

Parental leave is unpaid so not practically different from self-employed.

TheBigBean

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

Jezyboy said:

Maybe if you sort at least some of the issues you'd get better MPs though?

Given at least a sizeable minority vote for a potential PM rather than their preferred local representative, the idea of a temporary replacement during maternity leave doesn't seem 100% nuts.

There is a widespread view that MPs are employees, so should have the rights of employees as well as the disadvantages e.g. no second jobs. This isn't really their status which is much more like someone who is self-employed.

I accept the argument that if someone is sick or away on parental leave, their constituents are not represented, but I'm not sure that hiring someone else to do the job works. How does that person vote? Based on what they think, based on how they think the MP on leave would have voted or do they consult the MP on leave to find out how they should vote? The latter case would be better solved by proxy votes.

For what it is worth, self-employed people, such as me, don't get parental leave. If she was fighting for better rights for all, then I would have some sympathy, but she is fighting for better rights for a very small number of people, so given that she could, like many other people, make it work, I'm not that sympathetic.

Most people don't have creches in their work place. She is very lucky to have that even if the obvious solution that perhaps the dad could help out is seemingly not available.

Wife got a (very) basic minimum maternity allowance and is self employed. Not sure if this is available for fathers.

https://www.gov.uk/maternity-allowance/eligibility

Parental leave is unpaid so not practically different from self-employed.

You are entitled to the statutory payments from the government which is similar to being employed albeit many employers pay more. What you are not entitled to do is reclaim all your clients and lost revenues on your return in the way that an employee can return to their job. So, in my case, after two weeks (or whatever it is) of £100/week I would, in effect, be unemployed.

Of course, a self-employed person could pay to employ someone to keep their business running, but the success of that depends very much on individual businesses. In most cases, people simply accept that they will need to continue doing some work and making some decisions in order to ensure they still have a business on their return. This is what is being suggested to Stella Creasey.

There are also more MPs away due to sickness than parental leave, so the discussion should capture all absences.

rjsterry

TheBigBean said:

rjsterry said:

TheBigBean said:

Jezyboy said:

Maybe if you sort at least some of the issues you'd get better MPs though?

Given at least a sizeable minority vote for a potential PM rather than their preferred local representative, the idea of a temporary replacement during maternity leave doesn't seem 100% nuts.

There is a widespread view that MPs are employees, so should have the rights of employees as well as the disadvantages e.g. no second jobs. This isn't really their status which is much more like someone who is self-employed.

I accept the argument that if someone is sick or away on parental leave, their constituents are not represented, but I'm not sure that hiring someone else to do the job works. How does that person vote? Based on what they think, based on how they think the MP on leave would have voted or do they consult the MP on leave to find out how they should vote? The latter case would be better solved by proxy votes.

For what it is worth, self-employed people, such as me, don't get parental leave. If she was fighting for better rights for all, then I would have some sympathy, but she is fighting for better rights for a very small number of people, so given that she could, like many other people, make it work, I'm not that sympathetic.

Most people don't have creches in their work place. She is very lucky to have that even if the obvious solution that perhaps the dad could help out is seemingly not available.

Wife got a (very) basic minimum maternity allowance and is self employed. Not sure if this is available for fathers.

https://www.gov.uk/maternity-allowance/eligibility

Parental leave is unpaid so not practically different from self-employed.

You are entitled to the statutory payments from the government which is similar to being employed albeit many employers pay more. What you are not entitled to do is reclaim all your clients and lost revenues on your return in the way that an employee can return to their job. So, in my case, after two weeks (or whatever it is) of £100/week I would, in effect, be unemployed.

Of course, a self-employed person could pay to employ someone to keep their business running, but the success of that depends very much on individual businesses. In most cases, people simply accept that they will need to continue doing some work and making some decisions in order to ensure they still have a business on their return. This is what is being suggested to Stella Creasey.

There are also more MPs away due to sickness than parental leave, so the discussion should capture all absences.

I'm sure two weeks is manageable unless you never take holidays but know very well that taking 6 months or longer out will mean your customers go elsewhere.

Personally, I can't see why a reasonable workaround can't be arranged whereby Creasey can have her son with her in the chamber and step out briefly if needed. It will limit her participation somewhat, but no MP attends all debates anyway. I believe she already has her older daughter in the HoP crèche.

I agree illness related absence is at least as important an issue. Yes, they are personally the elected representative, but expecting indefinite good health in a bunch of generally middle-aged and not terribly healthy people is just unrealistic. Some form of locum or proxy system seems like the only practical option as the alternatives are long periods with no representative for some constituents, or endless byelections.

pblakeney

Simple solution - Proxy votes whichever way the whip says.
That's what'll happen for any contentious vote anyway.

Pross

pblakeney said:

Simple solution - Proxy votes whichever way the whip says.
That's what'll happen for any contentious vote anyway.

Or just trade votes with an opposition politician who also can't attend which I believe is commonplace. I'm inclined to agree with the politician who said they felt it was a publicity stunt. She represents Walthamstow so it's not like she's having to work away from home all the time so surely childcare arrangements can be made on those occasions where she needs to be in attendance outside normal daycare provision?

pblakeney

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

Simple solution - Proxy votes whichever way the whip says.
That's what'll happen for any contentious vote anyway.

Or just trade votes with an opposition politician who also can't attend which I believe is commonplace. I'm inclined to agree with the politician who said they felt it was a publicity stunt. She represents Walthamstow so it's not like she's having to work away from home all the time so surely childcare arrangements can be made on those occasions where she needs to be in attendance outside normal daycare provision?

Pross said:

pblakeney said:

Simple solution - Proxy votes whichever way the whip says.
That's what'll happen for any contentious vote anyway.

Or just trade votes with an opposition politician who also can't attend which I believe is commonplace. I'm inclined to agree with the politician who said they felt it was a publicity stunt. She represents Walthamstow so it's not like she's having to work away from home all the time so surely childcare arrangements can be made on those occasions where she needs to be in attendance outside normal daycare provision?

Yup.