MP's to be taught the difference between right and wrong

[Grumpmeister]

I did consider putting this into the 'Bizarre things' thread but this deserves a place all of it's own. A new government body has been proposed that will teach MP's the difference between right and wrong. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10922608/MPs-to-be-taught-difference-between-right-and-wrong-after-Maria-Miller-scandal.html

“Let me make absolutely plain – it is our view as a committee that the overwhelming majority of MPs do know the difference between right and wrong”.

Oh really Geoffrey? If that was the case then why was the committee that you sit on created? You have said that it is no longer right that MP's views on right and wrong are left to their own moral judgement but as we, the elected, have seen time after time the moral compass of the average MP seems to be missing it's needle. If they truly did know the difference between right and wrong (something that most normal people are capable of) then we wouldn't have seen so many cases of troughing perks or abuses of their position.

[Nick]

I saw this earlier. It is utterly bonkers!!!!!!

[Darwins Selection]

It will teach them Right, Wrong and Loopholes so none of the leeches miss out

[Steve]

. . .Oh really Geoffrey? If that was the case then why was the committee that you sit on created? You have said that it is no longer right that MP's views on right and wrong are left to their own moral judgement but as we, the elected, have seen time after time the moral compass of the average MP seems to be missing it's needle. If they truly did know the difference between right and wrong (something that most normal people are capable of) then we wouldn't have seen so many cases of troughing perks or abuses of their position.

How many dodgy MPs have you met?  Or seen in court?  Or forced to pay back expenses

Now divide by 650 to get an average . . . . . .

[The Moan Ranger]

. . .Oh really Geoffrey? If that was the case then why was the committee that you sit on created? You have said that it is no longer right that MP's views on right and wrong are left to their own moral judgement but as we, the elected, have seen time after time the moral compass of the average MP seems to be missing it's needle. If they truly did know the difference between right and wrong (something that most normal people are capable of) then we wouldn't have seen so many cases of troughing perks or abuses of their position.

How many dodgy MPs have you met?  Or seen in court?  Or forced to pay back expenses

Now divide by 650 to get an average . . . . . .

One is too many. Aren't they meant to be representing us? How can you possibly trust someone who might need to look at a website to decide what is acceptable and what isnt? I knew that by the age of 7. The vast majority are totally out of touch with the real world.  Put the whole lot in a big bag filled with bricks and chuck them in the North Sea. 

[Barman]

. . .Oh really Geoffrey? If that was the case then why was the committee that you sit on created? You have said that it is no longer right that MP's views on right and wrong are left to their own moral judgement but as we, the elected, have seen time after time the moral compass of the average MP seems to be missing it's needle. If they truly did know the difference between right and wrong (something that most normal people are capable of) then we wouldn't have seen so many cases of troughing perks or abuses of their position.

How many dodgy MPs have you met?  Or seen in court?  Or forced to pay back expenses

Now divide by 650 to get an average . . . . . .

One is too many. Aren't they meant to be representing us? How can you possibly trust someone who might need to look at a website to decide what is acceptable and what isnt? I knew that by the age of 7. The vast majority are totally out of touch with the real world.  Put the whole lot in a big bag filled with bricks and chuck them in the North Sea.

^^^ wot he said ^^^

One dodgy MP is too many....

...and it is still FAR too difficult to get rid of a dodgy MP apart from at a GE....

And yes, the average MP is completely out of touch with the real world.....

[apc2010]

. . .Oh really Geoffrey? If that was the case then why was the committee that you sit on created? You have said that it is no longer right that MP's views on right and wrong are left to their own moral judgement but as we, the elected, have seen time after time the moral compass of the average MP seems to be missing it's needle. If they truly did know the difference between right and wrong (something that most normal people are capable of) then we wouldn't have seen so many cases of troughing perks or abuses of their position.

How many dodgy MPs have you met?  Or seen in court?  Or forced to pay back expenses

Now divide by 650 to get an average . . . . . .

One is too many. Aren't they meant to be representing us? How can you possibly trust someone who might need to look at a website to decide what is acceptable and what isnt? I knew that by the age of 7. The vast majority are totally out of touch with the real world.  Put the whole lot in a big bag filled with bricks and chuck them in the North Sea.

^^^ wot he said ^^^

One dodgy MP is too many....

...and it is still FAR too difficult to get rid of a dodgy MP apart from at a GE....

And yes, the average MP is completely out of touch with the real world.....

 

[Steve]

. . .Oh really Geoffrey? If that was the case then why was the committee that you sit on created? You have said that it is no longer right that MP's views on right and wrong are left to their own moral judgement but as we, the elected, have seen time after time the moral compass of the average MP seems to be missing it's needle. If they truly did know the difference between right and wrong (something that most normal people are capable of) then we wouldn't have seen so many cases of troughing perks or abuses of their position.

How many dodgy MPs have you met?  Or seen in court?  Or forced to pay back expenses

Now divide by 650 to get an average . . . . . .

One is too many. Aren't they meant to be representing us? How can you possibly trust someone who might need to look at a website to decide what is acceptable and what isnt? I knew that by the age of 7. The vast majority are totally out of touch with the real world.  Put the whole lot in a big bag filled with bricks and chuck them in the North Sea.

^^^ wot he said ^^^

One dodgy MP is too many....

...and it is still FAR too difficult to get rid of a dodgy MP apart from at a GE....

And yes, the average MP is completely out of touch with the real world.....

 

Yes of course one is too much but this is the commons so surely no place for made up stats about "the average MP".

[Barman]

. . .Oh really Geoffrey? If that was the case then why was the committee that you sit on created? You have said that it is no longer right that MP's views on right and wrong are left to their own moral judgement but as we, the elected, have seen time after time the moral compass of the average MP seems to be missing it's needle. If they truly did know the difference between right and wrong (something that most normal people are capable of) then we wouldn't have seen so many cases of troughing perks or abuses of their position.

How many dodgy MPs have you met?  Or seen in court?  Or forced to pay back expenses

Now divide by 650 to get an average . . . . . .

One is too many. Aren't they meant to be representing us? How can you possibly trust someone who might need to look at a website to decide what is acceptable and what isnt? I knew that by the age of 7. The vast majority are totally out of touch with the real world.  Put the whole lot in a big bag filled with bricks and chuck them in the North Sea.

^^^ wot he said ^^^

One dodgy MP is too many....

...and it is still FAR too difficult to get rid of a dodgy MP apart from at a GE....

And yes, the average MP is completely out of touch with the real world.....

 

Yes of course one is too much but this is the commons so surely no place for made up stats about "the average MP".

I don't know why you always feel the need to post against 'the consensus' on here and defend what is/are often the indefensible...?

Clearly, it is only the 'wrongungs' that make the press and I'm sure there are some hard-working MPs that put their constituents before themselves or the party... but none spring to mind...

Time and time (and time) again we hear about dodgy MPs or just MPs that take the party line when they should (clearly surely) be representing those that elected them...

...MPs that campaign about keeping the local hospital open but then support the party line on closing local hospitals for a randomly chosen example....

... MPs that ignore the 20% that smoke...

...MPs that ignore the vast majority that support capital punishment....

...MPs that steal or spend frivolously (or vote to spend frivolously) taxpayer's hard earned...

I could go on but I won't.... and I'm not going to argue about it....

...perhaps you have 'facts' that prove that more than half of the 650 are gooduns.... I don't know?

...I just find it strange is all....

[Steve]

Because someone has to stand up against the "everyone knows" made up stuff usually based on the 'logic' that one swallow does make a summer.

Yes a few MPs are bad and most if not all MPs do not agree with you or me or even the man at the off-licence all the time.  So?

But continually trying to destroy the representative democracy system that has on the whole served us well isn't right

[Barman]

PS...

I can't help but think if grumpmeister had posted a link showing what fine fellows MPs were and we'd all agreed you'd be linking to the MPs expenses scandals and other things.... 

[Steve]

Well would it be true that all MPs are the bestest blokes and lasses you could ever meet?

 

The truth is very rarely black and white

[Barman]

Because someone has to stand up against the "everyone knows" made up stuff usually based on the 'logic' that one swallow does make a summer.

Yes a few MPs are bad and most if not all MPs do not agree with you or me or even the man at the off-licence all the time.  So?

But continually trying to destroy the representative democracy system that has on the whole served us well isn't right

 

Your post sneaked in before my PS!

But confirms my thoughts.... thanks! 

Surely, MPs sole role in life is to represent the majority...?

...and if the views of the majority are at odds with an MP with a PPS then so be it... he has a choice of resigning or representing those that voted for him/her...?

[Steve]

Because someone has to stand up against the "everyone knows" made up stuff usually based on the 'logic' that one swallow does make a summer.

Yes a few MPs are bad and most if not all MPs do not agree with you or me or even the man at the off-licence all the time.  So?

But continually trying to destroy the representative democracy system that has on the whole served us well isn't right

 

Your post sneaked in before my PS!

But confirms my thoughts.... thanks! 

Surely, MPs sole role in life is to represent the majority...?

...and if the views of the majority are at odds with an MP with a PPS then so be it... he has a choice of resigning or representing those that voted for him/her...?

Which is why we need a recall mechanism and imho (but not the electorate's) something better than first past the post

But would you really want to sack an MP that agreed with you on say 97 out of 100 issues in the hope that you could find an electable one that agreed on 100 of them?   

The biggest problem so many have with a representative democracy is so often it does what it says on the tin.  Represents that there isn't a single person in the land that 100% agrees with everyone else on everything.   

[Nick]

My MP is an evil, troughing Brownite bastard