Posted by Phil M on Saturday Dec 30, 12:33
Featured in many a Lib Dem leaflet is their campaign against Post Office closures - happily blaming the Labour government, and even in some cases scare-mongering about post offices that aren't likely to close.
We can argue all you like about the rights and wrongs of the issue, but on the day of the big announcement in the House of Commons about the future of Post Offices in the UK, where was John Leech MP? Sitting listening and commenting on or arguing with the announcement? Taking part in a debate at the highest level about what, according to many Lib Dem leaflets, is a crucial issue for his constituents?
No. He was in the Town Hall in Manchester at the Finance Scrutiny Committee, leaving part way through. Which I get the impression isn't where his constituents would have wanted him to be. I think when they voted for him they thought he would actually spend some time in parliament, debating the issues that matter to them.
That's the trouble with doing two jobs. You end up doing both of them badly.
+ tags coming soon
( 8 Comments )
peter h
Wednesday Jan 03, 20:13
most councillors also have a full time job. Why not John?
Steve
Wednesday Jan 03, 23:22
I actually think that MOST councillors are retired (though that is made up, but it seems likely). I would also hazard a guess that the vast majority of councillors don't have jobs that require them to be in London most week days.
Finally, most people's jobs allow them flexibility in the way they work. No one else can vote in Parliament when John Leech is in the City Council chambers. It's not like you can just get a temp in. He can't do both jobs at once because of the nature of the jobs, so naturally he ends up doing them both slightly less well than he could otherwise have done.
It is also a disgrace that along side him representing me badly as my councillor and as my MP, that he then takes two lots of my money to fund his political office.
Alan
Thursday Jan 04, 07:54
I don't have an issue with the two wages, if you do two jobs then you should get two wages. However, if you do get paid the money to do two jobs then you should do both jobs well!! ... Enough said!!
Bob
Thursday Jan 04, 09:33
He can't do both jobs at once. If you want the evidence look at his performance. As a councillor he is desperate, just a series of publicity stunts and press releases to cover up for himself and his two colleagues' poor performance (6 years in power and the shops on Merseybank are stilla disgrace despite endless promises by the Lib dems).As an MP he is an embarrassment to the constituency and his party. he is a pariah who will never shake off the fact that he cynically used cancer suffererers to futher his own selfish political cause. His colleagues talk about him behind his back and some of them are even plotting his downfall.
Adele
Thursday Jan 04, 17:12
Most councillors do not have full time jobs that require them to be in London, half the week.
Most councillors need a full time job to supplement their allowance or they wouldn't be able to live, feed their family e.t.c.
He has an MPs salary therefore does not need to do both.
sedgelypark
Thursday Jan 04, 22:24
Peter, I can only assume your comment re: John being a councillor and having a full time job was tongue in cheek.
But this is another exmaple of Hocus Focus mania and lies about an important issue being ignored by their onkl Manchester MP. They've been banging on about it for months and Leech should have been in Westminister raising this not fannying around the Town hall.
If it wasnl;t so sad it wouild be laughable. The Fibs must be fuming that they make a breakthough in Manc and then a halfwit wins the seat. But a well paid halfwit who should give up his council seat asap.
peter h
Saturday Jan 06, 20:24
yes it was tongue in cheek. I fail to see how john can do both jobs properly.
Dave
Saturday Jan 13, 22:45
"Steve Wednesday Jan 03, 23:22
It is also a disgrace that along side him representing me badly as my councillor and as my MP, that he then takes two lots of my money to fund his political office"
A bigger disgrace is a government spending vast amounts of money on a war that is going no where, and that didn't listen to the people it is supposed to represent when it took such action!
These comments are owned by the person that posted them. They are not necessarily indicative of public opinion and their content has not been checked for accuracy. If you find a comment you think violates our Terms of Use please report it.
Sorry, posting on this entry is disabled to prevent comment spam.
