Cyclone Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 I'm not sure what you think you are going to do with this information if you have it. Is that a reason to keep it secret, that you don't know what "I'll do with it"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 1. Are MP's accountable enough? I believe i was discussing it rather than pushing it as my own view. Youd have to go back to see what i posted, but I believe that was my point on the issues of wage secrecy, which overlaps in part with the need for MPs to be accountable and transparent. Nobody asked me do i think McConnells idea is amazing and should we do it or is there a need for it. No I dont, but it raises relevant issues and I dont think it would eb unreasonable in the name of transparency. 2. You keep pushing this DPA difficulty, but I dont see one. If the government deicdes it wants to make a DPA exception as you say it passes the apprproate SI. it does it all the time. 3. Thats you just creating an issue where there isnt one. If they decided they wanted to they could do it with no fuss. Until they so decide obviously nothing will happen. 4. The slipperly slope argument maybe but thats also an argument for never changing. 5.what's the limit? Ah a good question. Tbh I don't know it's all that line drawing again. The thread straddles two areas. i) Secrecy of salaries, which i think is interesting and its funny how countries differ. In the UK its the biggest secret ever and one of the rudest things you can ever ask someone compared to other countries that publish everyones salaries. ive been looking into it and it makes interesting reading as to the whys and wherefores. ii) This issue as proposed by McConnell. Transparency and accountability are important. If Mps were required to publish tax returns then it would be more transparent, which would be a good thing, but then im ok with the register of members interests and what I can read from that. The limit? Something that need to be reviewed all the time so you get the correct balance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 It's public nosiness not interest.. I suppose the same argument could have been made about the expenses for MPs... And look what that exposed. ---------- Post added 01-02-2016 at 14:42 ---------- So do we publish their driving licences to show they have zero points, DBS checks to show no convictions, bank statement so we can see their council tax d/debits, invoice for his new sofa, so we know its not off the back of a truck.??? Where does this principle of proving they follow the law always end? It generally makes the news if they get caught speeding. Even more so when they pass the points off to their wife and subsequently get caught. Opening these things to public scrutiny makes it harder for them to hide anything. ---------- Post added 01-02-2016 at 14:43 ---------- Do you think they're not accountable or transparent enough as it is? You did notice the expenses scandal in the news a little bit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 I think you will find they are.... they get a basic allowance and expenses. Sorry I stand corrected. I thought they just got expenses. the debate was about MP's so am not sure I'd extend it to councillors or not. On the basis of it being elected officials, then maybe i'd put a cap on the amount making anyone claiming above x amount. Whilst you are there Obleix there was a post you raised about the google tax and whether id mistaken turnover with profit. I just used the article form the same paper that Eric linked. I'd used it correctly but the paper may have been wrong, although its a figure I saw again last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 I suppose the same argument could have been made about the expenses for MPs... And look what that exposed. ---------- Post added 01-02-2016 at 14:42 ---------- It generally makes the news if they get caught speeding. Even more so when they pass the points off to their wife and subsequently get caught. Opening these things to public scrutiny makes it harder for them to hide anything. ---------- Post added 01-02-2016 at 14:43 ---------- You did notice the expenses scandal in the news a little bit? How many were actually breaking the law ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 Post #93 ... 999tigger seems to have ignored/missed it.. Or I could have been doing other things. Quite happy to be cirrected on the occasuins I get something wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 (edited) Or I could have been doing other things. Quite happy to be cirrected on the occasuins I get something wrong. As I said, you may have missed it... Edited February 1, 2016 by truman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 Sorry I stand corrected. I thought they just got expenses. the debate was about MP's so am not sure I'd extend it to councillors or not. On the basis of it being elected officials, then maybe i'd put a cap on the amount making anyone claiming above x amount. Whilst you are there Obleix there was a post you raised about the google tax and whether id mistaken turnover with profit. I just used the article form the same paper that Eric linked. I'd used it correctly but the paper may have been wrong, although its a figure I saw again last night. The media recently have been very fast and loose with profit, turnover and revenues...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
999tigger Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 The media recently have been very fast and loose with profit, turnover and revenues...... There is a difficulty knowing due to the secrecy of google. It wasnt the tunrnover or profit that i was wary of more the 3% figure. If i bump into it again ill post it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Arthur Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 Is that a reason to keep it secret, that you don't know what "I'll do with it"? Yes it is a reason. You should have a bloody good reason before you get to see anything that is private no matter who we're talking about. I'll ask you again, what do you think you are going to do with this information if you have it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now