Options
Labour's latest stunt-Civil Servants/Public Sector to be asked what their parents do.
Again a DM story so take with a pinch of salt.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2764628/Public-sector-staff-asked-parents-living-cut-number-middle-class-privately-educated-staff.html
Looney Labour want to force civil servants and the public sector to reveal what their parents do so they can employ people from lower class backgrounds.
More time wasting statistics kept for no damn reason but to justify their own egos and that they are thinking about the bottom end of society.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2764628/Public-sector-staff-asked-parents-living-cut-number-middle-class-privately-educated-staff.html
Looney Labour want to force civil servants and the public sector to reveal what their parents do so they can employ people from lower class backgrounds.
More time wasting statistics kept for no damn reason but to justify their own egos and that they are thinking about the bottom end of society.
0
Comments
The Guardian Herald Scotland
The Labour party being against nepotism?! Ha. That's the funniest thing I've heard on here in ages. The party is stuffed full of Milibands, Benns, Harman-Dromneys, Balls-Coopers, Eagles and with a new generation of Kinnock, Prescott, Straw and Blair looking at following in the family business
Don't be so silly you don't expect the Labour elite to follow the same rules as they expect us plebs to follow do you ?
So they will discriminate against people eminently qualified for jobs if their parents are hardworking and successful.
Well said.:D:D
I would suggest the very narrow scope of opportunities within a party is somewhat different to the plethora of opportunities and places available in the civil service, wouldn't you?
Your making it up as you go along...again...
The two are not mutually exclusive either.
Why shouldn't they look in their own house before forcing their ideology elsewhere? Perhaps starting with the deputy leader and her husband's meteoric rise to the top (of an all women shortlist) with a safe seat quickly handed out.
To paraphrase J. G. Brown: "Nepotism. It's in our DNA."
Whether this is the right answer to it or not I don't know, but as things stand we have the Tories doing nothing.
And it's not in the Tories or Lib Dems?
I was talking about the civil service, not parties. Someone else decided to shoehorn that in to the debate for purely political reasons...
"Nepotism: The Game the whole family can play."
You forgot about the Alexanders.
But it's OK for the Labour Party to do it because they're fighting the good socialist fight, or something along those lines. ;-)
It's the Labour party who want to probe civil servant backgrounds to discriminate (so much for equality for all) - the Conservatives or Lib Dems are not relevant here.
I didn't forget the Alexanders as I didn't realise that Douggie had a sister in Scottish politics until I looked it up. One I did forget was Rachel Reeves, whose sister Ellie is a member of Labour's National Executive Committee and and is married to John Cryer,
Oh and Keith Vaz's sister is also an MP.
I made a suggestion, it isn't confirmed fact.
As this diversion concerns party's, not the civil service, of course all party's are included.
Care to do the same for the Tories now?
Have the Tories ever claimed to believe in meritocracy?
His mum and dad were Labour MPs.
There is absolutely nothing in that article with that says civil servants will be forced to do anything.
Not even the Daily Heil is that stupid to lie about that. But it seems that you are more than willing to add words where they did not exist before.
So, how will these civil servant be forced to reveal the occupations of their parents? Will be threatened with the sack, perhaps? Put on the rack maybe, or will it be the dreaded comfy chair treatment?