Baroness Warsi and "militant secularisation"

geni said:
Err wasting their time at a tax payer's expense is a given; it is a council meeting. We accept that allowing them to be less than entirely efficient is a reasonable price to pay in order to have local democracy.
Click to expand...

Just because you are happy for people to be slackers doesn't mean the rest of us are.

geni said:
Allowing councils freedom of action is far more important than worrying about the feelings of the odd councillor who is offended by Mjölnir. And if it costs the ratepayers a few pounds thats democracy for you.
Click to expand...

No, that's not democracy. That's wasting tax payers' money. You may be rich enough to subsidise people talking to imaginary friends but that doesn't mean the rest of us need to pay for it.

geni said:
If you don't like it you are free to campain for the abolition of local goverment or councillors who exclusively conduct their meetings by IRC.
Click to expand...

Use a sledgehammer to crack a nut? No thanks, it's much easier just to stop wasting time by saying prayers.
 
geni said:
They aren't. Councillors get expenses. They are hardly required to turn up to meetings which is why you get the odd councillor living in spain.
Click to expand...

No, they get expenses and an allowance which is so big that if you pro rata it you'll find it is more than a lot of people get paid. For example £10k+ here: http://www.leics.gov.uk/index/your_council/local_democracy/constitution/6_members_allowance.htm

Minimum wage rates: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Employees/TheNationalMinimumWage/DG_10027201

Multiply 15 mins of that hourly rate by 36-40 councillors on a daily basis for a year and all that woo talking adds up to time and money that could have been used for something to benefit the people they represent.
 
joolz said:
Multiply 15 mins of that hourly rate by 36-40 councillors on a daily basis for a year and all that woo talking adds up to time and money that could have been used for something to benefit the people they represent.
Click to expand...

Well the people they represent might like the odd prayer. Remeber satanists have the vote as well.
 
joolz said:
Just because you are happy for people to be slackers doesn't mean the rest of us are.
Click to expand...

Well aparently you are since last I heard there was no political movement of any significance to make councillors turn up to meetings with any frequency. Heck only private eye thinks even the most extreme levels of non attendence are worth reporting.

No, that's not democracy. That's wasting tax payers' money. You may be rich enough to subsidise people talking to imaginary friends but that doesn't mean the rest of us need to pay for it.
Click to expand...

If you don't like your elected representatives chanting hare krishna you are free to vote for someone else. Thats how democracy is generaly meant to work.

Use a sledgehammer to crack a nut? No thanks, it's much easier just to stop wasting time by saying prayers.
Click to expand...

Well aparently it wasn't. However if you think praying is the only way in which councillors waste time and money you are probably not in a position to have an informed opinion on the subject.
 
This is the first I've heard of this loon, Warsi. Can someone explain how she was made a life peer after just two years in parliament? Does she have negatives or something?
 
geni said:
Well aparently it wasn't. However if you think praying is the only way in which councillors waste time and money you are probably not in a position to have an informed opinion on the subject.
Click to expand...

It's probably one of the few that are formalised on the agenda mind you.

I wonder if people would be happy with council meetings kicking off with 15 minutes of furious masturbation or a quarter hour of watching classic pop from the 1960s?

If people want to pray, do it before the meeting on your own time.
 
lionking said:
This is the first I've heard of this loon, Warsi. Can someone explain how she was made a life peer after just two years in parliament? Does she have negatives or something?
Click to expand...

Well, a female, Muslim Pakistani does tick a lot of boxes if you're monitoring quotas; it is hard to see how her results would justify receiving a peerage. Add in a bit of homophobia and other reactionary views to fit in with the Tory right wing.
 
geni said:
I'm failing to see any relevance. Well unless you are going to propose that we abandon local representative democracy and go either for direct democracy or abolish the whole thing entirely.
Click to expand...

Or people go to council meetings to do council business. Not to talk to their invisible friends.
 
Undesired Walrus said:
:confused:

She was born in Yorkshire.
Click to expand...

I still see the point about ticking the right boxes though.

But life peer? How many of these are handed out each year? She was a lawyer with a short parliamentary career behind her when she was elevated. I still can't understand it.
 
lionking said:
I still see the point about ticking the right boxes though.
Click to expand...

I know, it's just a pet peeve of mine.

But life peer? How many of these are handed out each year? She was a lawyer with a short parliamentary career behind her when she was elevated. I still can't understand it.
Click to expand...

She wasn't even an MP. It's quite clear she was only placed in the cabinet ('Minister without portfolio'?) so that the coalition could avoid the rather awkward headlines of being completely white (The liberals don't even have a single BAME MP).
 
Last edited:
geni said:
Well aparently you are since last I heard there was no political movement of any significance to make councillors turn up to meetings with any frequency. Heck only private eye thinks even the most extreme levels of non attendence are worth reporting.
Click to expand...

You have no basis on which to make that judgement of me. I'm happy enough with the council in my area, I've never seen them hit the Eye in all the years I've subscribed to it. If I thought you really cared I could post the figures.

geni said:
If you don't like your elected representatives chanting hare krishna you are free to vote for someone else. Thats how democracy is generaly meant to work.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you would switch to another party on something like prayers, but most of us look at the main issues. You have omitted the simple solution, you just have to change the rules on prayers, not the council, it's faster.

My elected representatives can chant Hare Krishna or light black candles for satan all they like, I just don't want it done in time I'm paying for.


geni said:
Well aparently it wasn't. However if you think praying is the only way in which councillors waste time and money you are probably not in a position to have an informed opinion on the subject.
Click to expand...

Who said I think that? Try reading what is written here. Time and money are wasted on a lot of things. That isn't a justification that it should also be wasted on prayers.
 
Multivac said:
Which makes her British, not Pakistani.
Click to expand...

Um, isn't that what I've just agreed I should have said?


ETA: The significant thing, politically, is that she is not white, and I over-simplified the situation in making my point; personally, I don't care what colour her skin is, but the Conservative party is conscious of how few non-white members of the government there are, and to the outsider that appears to have been a factor in her elevation.
 
Last edited:
Last of the Fraggles said:
It's probably one of the few that are formalised on the agenda mind you.

I wonder if people would be happy with council meetings kicking off with 15 minutes of furious masturbation or a quarter hour of watching classic pop from the 1960s?
Click to expand...

Well once council did manage to claim a visit to a lap dancing club on expenses (fact finding mission). Who knows maybe watching my little pony friendship is magic might actuay improve their standards of behaviour.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom