Seems a bit odd that The Speaker would not allow such data?
Surely we do have a right to know? Furthermore, given the scrutiny they’re under after recent revelations wouldn’t such data prove or disprove an MP’s attendance on the Palaces of Westminster on whatever day if allegations were ever made?
Are we actually getting our £84,000 worth from them?
But it might lead one to question where they were during a parliamentary session, especially when most have ‘second jobs’, would it not?
Why the secrecy in the seat of democracy?
Politicians reputations and behaviour are at an all-time low, one would surmise that the Speaker would ensure moves to open up the machinations of democracy, not veil it, surely?
The speaker can't have anything to hide. He is an elected Labour MP and many on here think it is only Tory ones that have things to hide. I support the one I think will do best for me and the area I live in so not for one or the other.
theshedman
//The speaker can't have anything to hide. He is an elected Labour MP and many on here think it is only Tory ones that have things to hide.//
Far from it, hence my across-the-house question in the OP.
No, The Soeaker will have nothing to hide I’m sure.
He does have a personal life that might raise an eyebrow though, tragic as it is.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindsay_Hoyle
That’s just for information purposes, no aspersions cast.
He does seem to run things his way and if they don't like it he gives them the choice to leave or get thrown out which as some have found out he will do. Got to have some sort of order in that place.
No one has said he is useless emmie. He just has his own way of talking and one thing I don't think I have seen is him getting ratty or raising his voice. Always calm.
ToraToraTora
//So attendance at the house is the only measure of whether an MP is working is it? Right oh!//
Well it would confirm their attendance at the Palaces of Westminster during a parliamentary session and not doing ‘consultancy work’ as part of their second job, no?