19-10-2012, 06:37 PM
12
Re: Ageism
It's true that experience, both of life in general and of the locality they intend to represent, should be a minimum requirement for becoming a representative of the electorate. Too often these days, young and sometimes vaccuous candidates are picked for their attractiveness or personableness, rather than their breadth of knowledge of the people and of the area they are hoping to represent.I think with a lot of MPs, public service is now more of a career choice rather than a desire to serve, and that is why our parliament is so full of wet behind the ears nonentities and a distinct lack of statesmen. Not only should there be some sort of upper and lower age limits to becoming an MP, but there should also a minimum qualification, which ideally should include some sort of practical and successful business experience as well as some sort of previous public service.
19-10-2012, 06:37 PM
13
Re: Ageism
Originally Posted by eccles
->
No, certainly not. There should be a compulsory requirement for each MP to live for at least a year on a so-called sink estate though, with no recourse to escaping back to their own homes and no access to income over a certain sum.
19-10-2012, 10:33 PM
15
Re: Ageism
Remember years ago people used to whinge that politicians were just ordinary people who tried to run a country? They used to be miners, plumbers, small business owners, just about any profession or trade you could think of.Well after years of calls for 'professional' politicians we have a parliament full of lawyers and political researchers. Be careful what you wish for.
20-10-2012, 07:11 AM
16
Re: Ageism
To be a politician one first has to learn how to lie, that said most under five year olds qualify, looking at Parliament today we have a lot of 5yr olds there judging by their behaviour.To be able to run the country one first has to learn economics which takes several years to learn it properly.
That being the case then the age should be around 30yrs old.
We do not need a lot of wind bags in parliament who linger until they die there so we should have a upper age limit for them to leave.
21-10-2012, 09:58 AM
17
Re: Ageism
Originally Posted by plantman
->
It's true that experience, both of life in general and of the locality they intend to represent, should be a minimum requirement for becoming a representative of the electorate. Too often these days, young and sometimes vaccuous candidates are picked for their attractiveness or personableness, rather than their breadth of knowledge of the people and of the area they are hoping to represent. I think with a lot of MPs, public service is now more of a career choice rather than a desire to serve, and that is why our parliament is so full of wet behind the ears nonentities and a distinct lack of statesmen. Not only should there be some sort of upper and lower age limits to becoming an MP, but there should also a minimum qualification, which ideally should include some sort of practical and successful business experience as well as some sort of previous public service.
21-10-2012, 11:51 AM
18
Re: Ageism
Originally Posted by Uncle Joe
->
Yes Barry, a lot of Tory politicians were 'parachuted' into winnable seats by Tory Central office over the heads of the local Party executive, simply because they had 'donated' a large sum to Central Office and thereby 'bought' their membership of the exclusive club the Palace of Westminster.
21-10-2012, 02:33 PM
19
Re: Ageism
Originally Posted by plantman
->
Again UJ, I was meaning politicians in general in my post, and I don't think you can make a party political point out of this, remember "Blairs Babes"...
11-11-2012, 01:35 PM
20
Re: Ageism
AgeismShould there be an upper age limit for being an MP. ???
As long as the MP is HONEST !!! and acts in the interest of the people who ellected him, and is in touch with reality, and most important does not claim expenses he or she is not entitled to then there should be no upper age limit. Possibly health and ability might be a factor to be taken regularly into account.
|
|
