Shopping & Style12 mins ago
Labour's Tristram Hunt To Quit As Mp
Answers
LOL..there you go mikey, you always did want to see the back of him.
09:49 Fri 13th Jan 2017
“Less so in the case of David Cameron, who resigned on principle…”
No he did not. He chucked his toys from the pram. In the run up to the referendum he stated that the decision (whether to leave or remain) was one for the electorate and that the government would act in accordance with their wishes. (Government pamphlet: ”This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide”). He also stated, on more than one occasion when directly asked, that he would lead that government. Within hours of getting the answer he did not like he was off. There were no principles involved.
No he did not. He chucked his toys from the pram. In the run up to the referendum he stated that the decision (whether to leave or remain) was one for the electorate and that the government would act in accordance with their wishes. (Government pamphlet: ”This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide”). He also stated, on more than one occasion when directly asked, that he would lead that government. Within hours of getting the answer he did not like he was off. There were no principles involved.
To return to generalities then, few MPs resign "as a matter of principle" and when they do it is notable and to be applauded. The most recent example I can think of is Zac Goldsmith.
I quite agree that for an MP to quit mid-term simply because a better offer came along is a considerable waste of taxpayers' dosh. Perhaps there should be a clause in their contracts (or whatever it is they are subject to) that should they "apply for stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds or the Manor of Northstead" the cost of the resulting by-election will be born by them personally.
It is clear that Mr Hunt saw the opportunity to become an MP as simply as temporary step in his career path. I suppose we should be grateful that he has at least resigned and not carried on as an MP whilst managing the V&A.
As an aside I noticed yesterday that the museum is planning to open a late-night bar with an outside terrace for up to 300 customers. The museum's neighbours, understandably are none too happy. Perhaps that's what has drawn Mr Hunt to his new job.
http://
I quite agree that for an MP to quit mid-term simply because a better offer came along is a considerable waste of taxpayers' dosh. Perhaps there should be a clause in their contracts (or whatever it is they are subject to) that should they "apply for stewardship of the Chiltern Hundreds or the Manor of Northstead" the cost of the resulting by-election will be born by them personally.
It is clear that Mr Hunt saw the opportunity to become an MP as simply as temporary step in his career path. I suppose we should be grateful that he has at least resigned and not carried on as an MP whilst managing the V&A.
As an aside I noticed yesterday that the museum is planning to open a late-night bar with an outside terrace for up to 300 customers. The museum's neighbours, understandably are none too happy. Perhaps that's what has drawn Mr Hunt to his new job.
http://
It is a vote of no confidence in his Party and its leader.
He realises he is in a dead-end job until the next General Election. Then his seat disappears and he cannot be bothered to fight Momentum for another one. He has seen something he would rather do, and has gone for it.
Waste of public money, but so are most of the no-hoper voting fodder rest of them.
He realises he is in a dead-end job until the next General Election. Then his seat disappears and he cannot be bothered to fight Momentum for another one. He has seen something he would rather do, and has gone for it.
Waste of public money, but so are most of the no-hoper voting fodder rest of them.
This seat will be abolished.
So the considerable expense of a by election is only for a temporary seat for 3 years. Stoke already has two other Labour MPs.
Why not just split Stoke Central as per the new boundaries, and let the constituents be represented by the two other MPs.
Would save a lot of pointless messing about.
So the considerable expense of a by election is only for a temporary seat for 3 years. Stoke already has two other Labour MPs.
Why not just split Stoke Central as per the new boundaries, and let the constituents be represented by the two other MPs.
Would save a lot of pointless messing about.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.