I thought being an MP is a fiull time job, this guys itinerary must look like a railway timetable, it's a newspaper that people hide behind on the tube or train on the way home, then when they have finished reading it they throw it on the floor, or leave it on the seat.
I wonder if TFL charge these free newspaper companys to clean up the mess that is left behind.
To be fair he is a journalist by trade. I'd far rather him edit a paper than be involved in government. Any chance that another journalist, Martin Bell, might be encouraged out of retirement?
This is his third job, at least, and he's supposedly working four days a week there. It's wholly incompatible with being an MP and a huge conflict of interest.
I'm not disputing any of that, my issue was more Leuth making it a party issue, when both sides are at it.
I'm sure if you worked out the average "other" earnings of Labour MPs and Tory MPs there would be a massive imbalance in favour of the Tories, but I agree the issue here isn't that Osborne is a Tory, rather that he's an MP. I can't imagine he'll be allowed to do both for very long.
Blair. Tony. Brown. Gordon - in 2014 MP with biggest outside income.
This is his third job, at least, and he's supposedly working four days a week there. It's wholly incompatible with being an MP and a huge conflict of interest.
I'm not disputing any of that, my issue was more Leuth making it a party issue, when both sides are at it.
I'm sure if you worked out the average "other" earnings of Labour MPs and Tory MPs there would be a massive imbalance in favour of the Tories, but I agree the issue here isn't that Osborne is a Tory, rather that he's an MP. I can't imagine he'll be allowed to do both for very long.
Blair. Tony. Brown. Gordon - in 2014 MP with biggest outside income.
Why do you think there might be an imbalance?
It would probably require a larger data set than two ex-prime ministers and an ex chancellor of the Exchequer
This is his third job, at least, and he's supposedly working four days a week there. It's wholly incompatible with being an MP and a huge conflict of interest.
I'm not disputing any of that, my issue was more Leuth making it a party issue, when both sides are at it.
I'm sure if you worked out the average "other" earnings of Labour MPs and Tory MPs there would be a massive imbalance in favour of the Tories, but I agree the issue here isn't that Osborne is a Tory, rather that he's an MP. I can't imagine he'll be allowed to do both for very long.
Blair. Tony. Brown. Gordon - in 2014 MP with biggest outside income.
Why do you think there might be an imbalance?
It would probably require a larger data set than two ex-prime ministers and an ex chancellor of the Exchequer
As if the evening standard is not right wing enough. British newspapers are majority Conservative. Not good for balanced debate. Ultimately, not good for a healthy democracy.
This is his third job, at least, and he's supposedly working four days a week there. It's wholly incompatible with being an MP and a huge conflict of interest.
I'm not disputing any of that, my issue was more Leuth making it a party issue, when both sides are at it.
I'm sure if you worked out the average "other" earnings of Labour MPs and Tory MPs there would be a massive imbalance in favour of the Tories, but I agree the issue here isn't that Osborne is a Tory, rather that he's an MP. I can't imagine he'll be allowed to do both for very long.
Blair. Tony. Brown. Gordon - in 2014 MP with biggest outside income.
Why do you think there might be an imbalance?
In fairness to Airman, I'm sure he's correct. But he's correct for no reasons that have anything whatsoever to do with whether they are left or right wing politicians. He's correct because no one with even a scintilla of a single brain cell would employ very many Labour's MPs to do anything at any level at all. It is a fact of life that employers (except Roland, obviously) tend to like to pay people that get something, anything, right just once in a while.
This is his third job, at least, and he's supposedly working four days a week there. It's wholly incompatible with being an MP and a huge conflict of interest.
He gets £40,000 per year just from the family wallpapering business.
Well-connected failures running the country, the business and the media. They achiever FUCK ALL except promoting their own interests and that is seen as a sign of competence and skill. Anyone criticising this is denounced as driven by envy. Fucking tragic for the country.
p.s. Rumours that I am about to join the staff of Racing Post are unfounded.
An interesting one. A whinge from one of George's constituents, about how he can't be doing his job as an MP properly and edit the ES at the same time.
Why wasn't there a petition when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer? Surely he had no time at all to do regular MP stuff while doing that job?
p.s. Rumours that I am about to join the staff of Racing Post are unfounded.
An interesting one. A whinge from one of George's constituents, about how he can't be doing his job as an MP properly and edit the ES at the same time.
Why wasn't there a petition when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer? Surely he had no time at all to do regular MP stuff while doing that job?
To be fair he is a journalist by trade. I'd far rather him edit a paper than be involved in government. Any chance that another journalist, Martin Bell, might be encouraged out of retirement?
In the same way that Daisy is a CEO or a lawyer even & Roland a successful football club owner!
How can people accuse the Tories of being out of touch when one of their most prominent MPs is showing solidarity with many of Britain's poorest by working multiple jobs?
p.s. Rumours that I am about to join the staff of Racing Post are unfounded.
An interesting one. A whinge from one of George's constituents, about how he can't be doing his job as an MP properly and edit the ES at the same time.
Why wasn't there a petition when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer? Surely he had no time at all to do regular MP stuff while doing that job?
There's no conflict of interest in being an MP and Chancellor of the Exchequer.
There are huge conflicts of interest between being a member of the Privy Council and a newspaper editor. Or between being a salaried fund manager adviser and editing a newspaper with a City page. Or being on the board of the Northern Powerhouse and editing a London newspaper.
This appointment is wrong for all the obvious reasons, but some of the hysteria is rather OTT. Some Blackrock worker called in to LBC to complain he never saw Osborne in his office. So what? What does that even mean?
p.s. Rumours that I am about to join the staff of Racing Post are unfounded.
An interesting one. A whinge from one of George's constituents, about how he can't be doing his job as an MP properly and edit the ES at the same time.
Why wasn't there a petition when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer? Surely he had no time at all to do regular MP stuff while doing that job?
There's no conflict of interest in being an MP and Chancellor of the Exchequer.
There are huge conflicts of interest between being a member of the Privy Council and a newspaper editor. Or between being a salaried fund manager adviser and editing a newspaper with a City page. Or being on the board of the Northern Powerhouse and editing a London newspaper.
I couldn't agree more. But the primary focus of the petition was very much on the amount of time available to him to do the MP's job properly rather than whether there was a conflict of interest. My point was that, surely, in the normal course of events, one would expect cabinet-level jobs to be rather more time-consuming than editing a London freebie paper, consisting mainly of Arsenal, adverts and suduko?
At the end of the day, we, as a country, need to decide whether or not we are happy for Members of Parliament to be properly remunerated. Clearly, the money available at present is insufficient to attract high-calibre individuals to a career in politics. That's why many go off and do other stuff.
p.s. Rumours that I am about to join the staff of Racing Post are unfounded.
An interesting one. A whinge from one of George's constituents, about how he can't be doing his job as an MP properly and edit the ES at the same time.
Why wasn't there a petition when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer? Surely he had no time at all to do regular MP stuff while doing that job?
There's no conflict of interest in being an MP and Chancellor of the Exchequer.
There are huge conflicts of interest between being a member of the Privy Council and a newspaper editor. Or between being a salaried fund manager adviser and editing a newspaper with a City page. Or being on the board of the Northern Powerhouse and editing a London newspaper.
I couldn't agree more. But the primary focus of the petition was very much on the amount of time available to him to do the MP's job properly rather than whether there was a conflict of interest. My point was that, surely, in the normal course of events, one would expect cabinet-level jobs to be rather more time-consuming than editing a London freebie paper, consisting mainly of Arsenal, adverts and suduko?
At the end of the day, we, as a country, need to decide whether or not we are happy for Members of Parliament to be properly remunerated. Clearly, the money available at present is insufficient to attract high-calibre individuals to a career in politics. That's why many go off and do other stuff.
I don't think you can dismiss the amount of time it takes to edit the most important regional newspaper in the most important city in the country at the most important political time for generations! In any other circumstances it's a full-time job. (And by full-time, I mean full-time in junior doctors' experience, not MPs').
I totally agree that we should pay MPs much, much more money. In my view, it should be £250k a year and should continue for two years after the MP loses his/her seat. But there are some people for whom even that wouldn't be enough. George Osborne, for example, isn't being forced to find more work becuase he's on the bread line.
p.s. Rumours that I am about to join the staff of Racing Post are unfounded.
An interesting one. A whinge from one of George's constituents, about how he can't be doing his job as an MP properly and edit the ES at the same time.
Why wasn't there a petition when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer? Surely he had no time at all to do regular MP stuff while doing that job?
There's no conflict of interest in being an MP and Chancellor of the Exchequer.
There are huge conflicts of interest between being a member of the Privy Council and a newspaper editor. Or between being a salaried fund manager adviser and editing a newspaper with a City page. Or being on the board of the Northern Powerhouse and editing a London newspaper.
I couldn't agree more. But the primary focus of the petition was very much on the amount of time available to him to do the MP's job properly rather than whether there was a conflict of interest. My point was that, surely, in the normal course of events, one would expect cabinet-level jobs to be rather more time-consuming than editing a London freebie paper, consisting mainly of Arsenal, adverts and suduko?
At the end of the day, we, as a country, need to decide whether or not we are happy for Members of Parliament to be properly remunerated. Clearly, the money available at present is insufficient to attract high-calibre individuals to a career in politics. That's why many go off and do other stuff.
I don't think you can dismiss the amount of time it takes to edit the most important regional newspaper in the most important city in the country at the most important political time for generations! In any other circumstances it's a full-time job. (And by full-time, I mean full-time in junior doctors' experience, not MPs').
I totally agree that we should pay MPs much, much more money. In my view, it should be £250k a year and should continue for two years after the MP loses his/her seat. But there are some people for whom even that wouldn't be enough. George Osborne, for example, isn't being forced to find more work becuase he's on the bread line.
You do know he he'll have staff doing all the heavy lifting?
Here's a list of the current editorial staff: Editorial contact details
Editor: Sarah Sands E: editor@standard.co.uk Senior Deputy Editor: Ian Walker E: editor@standard.co.uk Deputy Editor: Charlotte Ross E: editor@standard.co.uk Managing Editor: Doug Wills E: managingeditor@standard.co.uk Business & City Editor: Jim Armitage ES Magazine Editor: Laura Weir Homes & Property Editor: Janice Morley Londoner's diary Editor: Joy Lo Dico News Editor: Jack Lefley Digital Operations Editor: Neil Hunter
I'm guessing he won't be dealing personally with all those editor@standard.co.uk emails........
p.s. Rumours that I am about to join the staff of Racing Post are unfounded.
An interesting one. A whinge from one of George's constituents, about how he can't be doing his job as an MP properly and edit the ES at the same time.
Why wasn't there a petition when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer? Surely he had no time at all to do regular MP stuff while doing that job?
There's no conflict of interest in being an MP and Chancellor of the Exchequer.
There are huge conflicts of interest between being a member of the Privy Council and a newspaper editor. Or between being a salaried fund manager adviser and editing a newspaper with a City page. Or being on the board of the Northern Powerhouse and editing a London newspaper.
I couldn't agree more. But the primary focus of the petition was very much on the amount of time available to him to do the MP's job properly rather than whether there was a conflict of interest. My point was that, surely, in the normal course of events, one would expect cabinet-level jobs to be rather more time-consuming than editing a London freebie paper, consisting mainly of Arsenal, adverts and suduko?
At the end of the day, we, as a country, need to decide whether or not we are happy for Members of Parliament to be properly remunerated. Clearly, the money available at present is insufficient to attract high-calibre individuals to a career in politics. That's why many go off and do other stuff.
I don't think you can dismiss the amount of time it takes to edit the most important regional newspaper in the most important city in the country at the most important political time for generations! In any other circumstances it's a full-time job. (And by full-time, I mean full-time in junior doctors' experience, not MPs').
I totally agree that we should pay MPs much, much more money. In my view, it should be £250k a year and should continue for two years after the MP loses his/her seat. But there are some people for whom even that wouldn't be enough. George Osborne, for example, isn't being forced to find more work becuase he's on the bread line.
You do know he he'll have staff doing all the heavy lifting?
Here's a list of the current editorial staff: Editorial contact details
Editor: Sarah Sands E: editor@standard.co.uk Senior Deputy Editor: Ian Walker E: editor@standard.co.uk Deputy Editor: Charlotte Ross E: editor@standard.co.uk Managing Editor: Doug Wills E: managingeditor@standard.co.uk Business & City Editor: Jim Armitage ES Magazine Editor: Laura Weir Homes & Property Editor: Janice Morley Londoner's diary Editor: Joy Lo Dico News Editor: Jack Lefley Digital Operations Editor: Neil Hunter
I'm guessing he won't be dealing personally with all those editor@standard.co.uk emails........
A newspaper editor is one of the few roles that runs the risk of the position holder going to jail for performing badly in their role. The editor is ultimately responsible for every word and picture printed (or placed online) every day. So brushing the position off as a bunch of tasks that can be passed off to Ian and Charlotte is to misconstrue the position astonishingly.
You're right that he won't "deal" with all the emails sent to the email address. But he will - or at least he should - read every one that's printed. As well as every reponse that's written. As well as all other articles, columns, features and stories that are published.
The Editor determines the editorial policy, direction and political bias of the title; determines which campaigns to run, how, when and for how long; decides the size of every issue and what goes on every page; the name, frequency, design, look and feel and positioning of all furniture across the title; decides on the frequency, content and price of all supplements, brand extensions and online versions; enables and delivers the monetisation of electronic versions; determines where, when and what type of advertising the title takes, including classified, display, inserts, wraparounds, earpieces and gatefolds; determines how, where, when, by whom and at what times the title is distributed; and determines how - or whether - the title competes with other titles launched in the market.
So, yes, I *do* know he has Ian and Charlotte helping out; a team of editors for various parts of the Standard. But that does not diminish the size of the role. In fact, as he will also need to recruit their replacements, the fact he has several direct reports increases the onerous size of the task.
Your list, of course, is not exhaustive. There are many, many reporters, photographers, freelancers and subs working to produce the Standard every day. I would think a lot of them will be very pissed off that an amateur has been parachuted in.
For an experienced journalist (like Sarah Sands, with more than two decades' experience in newspapers) it's a full-time, full-on job. For someone with as little grasp of journalism as Osborne, it must be a lot more than "full time".
Parliament is becoming a complete farce - there is no attempt to deal with any conflict of interests anymore. Osborne is a serial incompetent who gets jobs based on his contacts and then we have the ludicrous spectacle of right wing journalists defending him on the basis of the fact that he's a jolly good chap and his outside interests will somehow benefit Parliament.
He has demonstrated his utter contempt for his role as MP - on a par with the twat Farage as an MEP.
It doesn't seem to matter how absolutely f***ing useless you are as a politician if you've got contacts you will be okay. We are as ridiculous as the US ....
Just a hard working chap. You leftie oiks are the limit, really.
Hmm so constituents not being mugged off then ? no apparent conflict of interest between role as MP / Editor / Head of business fund ? never mind if he has the capacity to do all these jobs effectively, near total domination of media by minority of right wing media tycoons that support the Conservatives, noting to see here guv move on. Everything is peachy.
Comments
I wonder if TFL charge these free newspaper companys to clean up the mess that is left behind.
How does this guy get to edit a newspaper.
Brown. Gordon - in 2014 MP with biggest outside income.
Why do you think there might be an imbalance?
Why wasn't there a petition when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer? Surely he had no time at all to do regular MP stuff while doing that job?
In the same way that Daisy is a CEO or a lawyer even & Roland a successful football club owner!
There are huge conflicts of interest between being a member of the Privy Council and a newspaper editor. Or between being a salaried fund manager adviser and editing a newspaper with a City page. Or being on the board of the Northern Powerhouse and editing a London newspaper.
At the end of the day, we, as a country, need to decide whether or not we are happy for Members of Parliament to be properly remunerated. Clearly, the money available at present is insufficient to attract high-calibre individuals to a career in politics. That's why many go off and do other stuff.
I totally agree that we should pay MPs much, much more money. In my view, it should be £250k a year and should continue for two years after the MP loses his/her seat. But there are some people for whom even that wouldn't be enough. George Osborne, for example, isn't being forced to find more work becuase he's on the bread line.
Here's a list of the current editorial staff:
Editorial contact details
Editor: Sarah Sands
E: editor@standard.co.uk
Senior Deputy Editor: Ian Walker
E: editor@standard.co.uk
Deputy Editor: Charlotte Ross
E: editor@standard.co.uk
Managing Editor: Doug Wills
E: managingeditor@standard.co.uk
Business & City Editor: Jim Armitage
ES Magazine Editor: Laura Weir
Homes & Property Editor: Janice Morley
Londoner's diary Editor: Joy Lo Dico
News Editor: Jack Lefley
Digital Operations Editor: Neil Hunter
I'm guessing he won't be dealing personally with all those editor@standard.co.uk emails........
You're right that he won't "deal" with all the emails sent to the email address. But he will - or at least he should - read every one that's printed. As well as every reponse that's written. As well as all other articles, columns, features and stories that are published.
The Editor determines the editorial policy, direction and political bias of the title; determines which campaigns to run, how, when and for how long; decides the size of every issue and what goes on every page; the name, frequency, design, look and feel and positioning of all furniture across the title; decides on the frequency, content and price of all supplements, brand extensions and online versions; enables and delivers the monetisation of electronic versions; determines where, when and what type of advertising the title takes, including classified, display, inserts, wraparounds, earpieces and gatefolds; determines how, where, when, by whom and at what times the title is distributed; and determines how - or whether - the title competes with other titles launched in the market.
So, yes, I *do* know he has Ian and Charlotte helping out; a team of editors for various parts of the Standard. But that does not diminish the size of the role. In fact, as he will also need to recruit their replacements, the fact he has several direct reports increases the onerous size of the task.
Your list, of course, is not exhaustive. There are many, many reporters, photographers, freelancers and subs working to produce the Standard every day. I would think a lot of them will be very pissed off that an amateur has been parachuted in.
For an experienced journalist (like Sarah Sands, with more than two decades' experience in newspapers) it's a full-time, full-on job. For someone with as little grasp of journalism as Osborne, it must be a lot more than "full time".
He has demonstrated his utter contempt for his role as MP - on a par with the twat Farage as an MEP.
It doesn't seem to matter how absolutely f***ing useless you are as a politician if you've got contacts you will be okay. We are as ridiculous as the US ....
What's his salary likely to be at the Standard?