Re: Data retention question

In article <271DED10-0CBD-472D-8FA9-216749F76F60-BFib/[email protected]>, Ian 
Batten <igb-BFib/[email protected]> writes
>
>On 16 Jul 2014, at 22:23, Roland Perry <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> In article <7FE96CB2-EE08-4791-9770-C079D607C25F-BFib/[email protected]>, Ian 
>>Batten <igb-BFib/[email protected]> writes
>>>> This is also why people attempting to mock the Parliamentary system 
>>>>by posting photos of a handful of members in the chamber are 
>>>>attempting  to leverage a falsehood. MPs can't be in several places 
>>>>at once, and hopping from meeting to another is simply par for the course.
>>>
>>> So what's the point of having the debate at all if the other 90% of 
>>>the MPs are simply going to
>>> vote on party lines without listening to a word of what was said?
>>
>> Because all the issues have been aired at length for some time. Not 
>>just since April but in the debates surrounding the 2012 comms data 
>>bill.
>
>And yet, as the photo-montage you are objecting to so accurately shows, 
>when the issue is pay, suddenly MPs find themselves with a pressing 
>need to be present in the chamber.  It is, indeed, most odd: it's after 
>all not as though the issues around pay for MPs hadn't been well 
>exercised in the preceding days, is it?

I hadn't heard there was debate about pay - I don't follow the 
proceedings that closely. But it's not a very good example because 
everyone is interested in their pay, however not every MP can attend all 
sessions (literally, they happen simultaneously - there were six Select 
Committees sitting at the same time last Tuesday afternoon as well as 
numerous other meeting elsewhere than the chamber).

>I am, I suspect, rather older than James, and usually am ready to 
>defend MPs against the accusation that they are lobby fodder.  Here, 
>however, they appear to be lobby fodder.

There's also the possibility that they've studied the issue and are in 
substantial agreement.

>And as to the shadow home secretary's claim that her children know more 
>about crypto policy than she does, I can only presume she also smugly 
>tells people at dinner parties that she can't program her video 
>recorder, as though that makes her more interesting. Why do MPs make 
>out that utter ignorance of technology is something to be proud of?

That's a rather different issue, and my approach to that is to actually 
contribute (educate, inform etc) at first hand regarding technology 
issues when I think it'll help. How many others here were available 
on-site on Tuesday (albeit I was there for a different workstream than 
Data Retention, and neither was it HS2 or Shale Gas, both of which I'm 
interested in).

-- 
Roland Perry