Welcome to Stafford Forum. Please or sign-up and start posting!
D'you know, I don't think you have...I may have missed the sentence where a named person says what they propose to do about it.......
He doesn't have to be up to the job - as long as 48.5% of the electorate vote for him.On meeting Jezza twice in the last year I have pressed him on two things,; Pedestrian priority at Newport rd and Station Rd and the predicament of the SDGH/County Hospital on both occasions I have drawn a blank. The guy is not up to the job and should resign.....
If ability was a job prerequisite, then we'd have no politicians left and most large companies would be without their CEO and directors.The guy is not up to the job and should resign.....
It's largely a waste of everybody's time, to be fair.Electorate questions with Y/N answers
Pedestrian priority at Newport rd station Rd ?
Ensure NHS is delivered
Tell us where you now stand on brexit and if you are prepared to vote against the government because you know that the people you represent will be disadvantaged by brexit
even though they voted for brexit.... Oh ffs! ..
There may not be a universal understanding of what his 'job' is - we get to vote on who the MP is, that's it.If ability was a job prerequisite, then we'd have no politicians left and most large companies would be without their CEO and directors.
You can't make it up....When I contacted him about marriage equality, he assured me that by voting against the planned changes, he was serving the interests of his mostly older constituents. Apparently forgetting that it's us young constituents that will be voting for him in 10-15 years when the old ones have died off.
This ^. The only 'power' we have over 'them' is when we vote. The in between bit when they're in, the most important part, is where we have absolutely no control, and boy don't most know it.Odd really. Everyone knows they will screw us over terribly, but most are scared in case anyone else screws us over other than them.
Same question and same response.When I contacted him about marriage equality, he assured me that by voting against the planned changes, he was serving the interests of his mostly older constituents. Apparently forgetting that it's us young constituents that will be voting for him in 10-15 years when the old ones have died off.
It's easier than admitting he only listens to the party whip, better to pretend he's protecting someone's interests just not yours.Why is it in the interests of his older constituents I wonder?
Why is it in the interests of his older constituents I wonder?
What he actually means by old constituents is the old farts who inhabit the Conservative Association. Not usually famed for their tolerance of different persuasions...He said that his older constituents had contacted him to say they didn't approve of it. I know that myself and at least a few other "young" (mid-20's) people had contacted him to express support for equalisation and, as PeterD has said, all got the same response.
As for why he only cares about his older constituents, it comes down to the fact that old people tend to vote more than young people and politics is a popularity game now instead of a 'trying to better the country'-game