Dan Poulter

1966_and_all_that

1966_and_all_that

Well-known member
The Tory MP and former health minister, Dan Poulter, has defected to Labour, saying the Conservatives have become a “nationalist party of the right” that has abandoned compassion and no longer prioritises the NHS. This might look like a rat leaving the sinking ship in order to preserve his political career. However, He's not standing at the next election, instead he is going back to work full time in the NHS. Poulter has always been a centre-right, 'one nation' Tory and he has become massively disillusioned with the party's drift further to the right and seeming disinterest in public services.
 
Last edited:
It’s a strange one this.

Apparently his attendance in Parliament was limited as he worked front line NHS.

Surely if one job (however important) stops you attending parliament you shouldn’t become an MP.

Then again, first hand real life experience is valuable in itself.

Not sure what’s right or wrong here!
 
Great free transfer. Was there a signing on fee involved . bonus plus first bench appearances. great bit of business.
 
seasideone said:
It’s a strange one this.

Apparently his attendance in Parliament was limited as he worked front line NHS.

Surely if one job (however important) stops you attending parliament you shouldn’t become an MP.

Then again, first hand real life experience is valuable in itself.

Not sure what’s right or wrong here!
Click to expand...

He's not standing at next election because of that I believe. Intends to focus more on work and step into a more advisory role.

It's an interesting double bind. If you professionalise being an MP you create politicians who only know politics. If you don't, you end up with votes being ignored, debates unattended etc.

As you say, not sure what answer is.
 
td53 said:
He's not standing at next election because of that I believe. Intends to focus more on work and step into a more advisory role.

It's an interesting double bind. If you professionalise being an MP you create politicians who only know politics. If you don't, you end up with votes being ignored, debates unattended etc.

As you say, not sure what answer is.
Click to expand...
Remote voting?

The whole thing is actually an argument for all MPs to have multiple jobs!!
 
seasideone said:
Remote voting?

The whole thing is actually an argument for all MPs to have multiple jobs!!
Click to expand...

It sounds like he could be in a good position to advise a future government on how to move forward with the NHS. Maybe that is what he is hoping for.
Equally maybe Labour just want the headlines now and will want nothing to do with him after the election.

The only other reason I can see for him doing this is simply to make life a bit easier working full time in the NHS going forward, but I don’t think that really cuts it.

I do think he is right about the Conservative’s direction of travel TBH, as they have given far more power to members and local activists in electing the leader. They have I think have tended to be considerably more populist/right wing than MP’s. Less so since the Cummings/Johnson removal of moderates a few years ago.
I don’t see how this rightward drift stops as it seems baked into the system now.
 
glasshalffull said:
It sounds like he could be in a good position to advise a future government on how to move forward with the NHS. Maybe that is what he is hoping for.
Equally maybe Labour just want the headlines now and will want nothing to do with him after the election.

The only other reason I can see for him doing this is simply to make life a bit easier working full time in the NHS going forward, but I don’t think that really cuts it.

I do think he is right about the Conservative’s direction of travel TBH, as they have given far more power to members and local activists in electing the leader. They have I think have tended to be considerably more populist/right wing than MP’s. Less so since the Cummings/Johnson removal of moderates a few years ago.
I don’t see how this rightward drift stops as it seems baked into the system now.
Click to expand...
A hammering at the GE will concentrate minds. The same happened with Labour after the 2019 massacre.
 
td53 said:
He's not standing at next election because of that I believe. Intends to focus more on work and step into a more advisory role.

It's an interesting double bind. If you professionalise being an MP you create politicians who only know politics. If you don't, you end up with votes being ignored, debates unattended etc.

As you say, not sure what answer is.
Click to expand...
The answer lies in creating a different kind of political class, accompanied by changing / influencing public opinion.

Many of the people we currently see in positions of influence study Politics or a related degree at University, dabble in University Politics, works as a researcher / gopher for an MP in holidays and then when they graduate do more of the same whilst trying to get on a candidate list . Many of them end up in Parliament without ever having worked in the private sector or managed a team of people.

And that is only part of it. Running a Government is possibly the most complex, multi-faceted challenge there is. The Civil Service machine that services the Government is pretty good - albeit could be significantly improved. But many of their political masters are wholly unequipped for the job.

We need more people from commerce or from science and engineering backgrounds who are able able to manage resources, run major projects and get the most out of people. We won't get those people unless we :

  • change the way we select candidates
  • give less importance to tribal political structures
  • make more imaginative use of secondments and
  • recompense organisations that are prepared to lend their talent to the Executive

It's a project that could take a generation to deliver, sadly. And five year Parliamentary terms don't encourage either of the main political parties to even contemplate it.
 
Part of the problem is the pittance of a salary MPs are paid.

If you want the best people you have pay for it!
 
T
basilrobbie3 said:
The answer lies in creating a different kind of political class, accompanied by changing / influencing public opinion.

Many of the people we currently see in positions of influence study Politics or a related degree at University, dabble in University Politics, works as a researcher / gopher for an MP in holidays and then when they graduate do more of the same whilst trying to get on a candidate list . Many of them end up in Parliament without ever having worked in the private sector or managed a team of people.

And that is only part of it. Running a Government is possibly the most complex, multi-faceted challenge there is. The Civil Service machine that services the Government is pretty good - albeit could be significantly improved. But many of their political masters are wholly unequipped for the job.

We need more people from commerce or from science and engineering backgrounds who are able able to manage resources, run major projects and get the most out of people. We won't get those people unless we :

  • change the way we select candidates
  • give less importance to tribal political structures
  • make more imaginative use of secondments and
  • recompense organisations that are prepared to lend their talent to the Executive

It's a project that could take a generation to deliver, sadly. And five year Parliamentary terms don't encourage either of the main political parties to even contemplate it.
Click to expand...
That begs the question what you think MPs should be doing. MPs who have worked for charities, done work for socially responsible law firms, been local Councillors, have all shown some mettle. It is important that these people are not professional politicians - former SPADs, apparatchiks - but that they have public service in their blood.

I want our top rung MPs - the Government members - to have vision. I'm not interested in them being managers or CEOs. We have a civil service to do that stuff.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
T

That begs the question what you think MPs should be doing. MPs who have worked for charities, done work for socially responsible law firms, been local Councillors, have all shown some mettle. It is important that these people are not professional politicians - former SPADs, apparatchiks - but that they have public service in their blood.

I want our top rung MPs - the Government members - to have vision. I'm not interested in them being managers or CEOs. We have a civil service to do that stuff.
Click to expand...
No comment.
 
seasideone said:
Part of the problem is the pittance of a salary MPs are paid.

If you want the best people you have pay for it!
Click to expand...
I don't think that's necessarily true, Vennells was paid 4.5 million over her term, a Band 5 nurse starts at 28k a year.

Sometimes the more people are paid the more they'll do to protect their own job.
 
Lytham_fy8 said:
I don't think that's necessarily true, Vennells was paid 4.5 million over her term, a Band 5 nurse starts at 28k a year.

Sometimes the more people are paid the more they'll do to protect their own job.
Click to expand...

I am sure you can find an exception to most rules.

The reality is in life you tend to get what you pay for.
 
We need more scientists, engineers and technologists on the Commons benches, rather than Politics, Philosophy and Economics (PPE) or History and English graduates from Oxbridge. That is, people who have had a rigorous factual education, not one of political theories, subjective opinions and waffle.

Look at the college education of the last five Tory PMs...
Cameron - PPE
May - Geography
Bozo - Classics, ancient languages, literature, history, and philosophy
Truss - PPE
Sunak - PPE

We can top that up with a couple of Tory leaders who never made PM - Hague (PPE) and Howard (Economics and Law). You have to go back 40+ years to that RW heroine Thatcher for a Tory scientist, who studied Chemistry. Yet she soon abandoned science and trained up to be, yes, a lawyer. Edward Heath was another Oxford PPE graduate. Major did not go to college of course and, arguably, was slightly the better for it. Apart from Black Wednesday that is.

It has been no better for Labour with Wilson (PPE), Foot (PPE), Kinnock (Industrial Relations and History), Smith (Law), Blair (Jurisprudence or Law) and Brown (History, mainly political history), Miliband (PPE) and now Starmer (Law).

Not exactly inspiring is it? These waffling PPE generalists and lawyers also tend to become our corporate executives and managers (e.g. Vennells - Russian French and Economics graduate) while our scientists and engineers are rarely given the chance and are notoriously poorly paid in relative terms, even though it is they who come up with the new ideas in technology. Angela Merkel had a PhD in nuclear physics which shows how the Germans rate scientists.

At least Dr Poulter, being a medic, though dealing with psychiatry and mental health, is almost a scientist.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top