High-profile figure on party’s right accused of causing ‘significant damage’ to reputation of parliament

The Conservative MP Miriam Cates, a high-profile figure on the party’s right wing, is being investigated by the parliamentary standards watchdog.

Cates, the MP for Penistone and Stocksbridge in South Yorkshire since 2019, is being investigated for “actions causing significant damage to the reputation of the house as a whole, or of its members generally”, a brief notice on the website of the commissioner for standards said.

The inquiry falls under paragraph 17 of the updated 2019 code of conduct for MPs, which says: “Members shall never undertake any action which would cause significant damage to the reputation and integrity of the House of Commons as a whole, or of its members generally.”

  • Syldon@feddit.ukEnglish
    11·
    11 months ago

    I understand why it’s so controversial to say, but the more educated you are, the less kids you’re likely to have and a declining birth rate is a problem for any economy.

    Show me a study to prove this. It is just nonsensical BS, imo. The more educated you, the more likely you are to be above the mean wage. Money is the issue today.

    Fifty years ago, only the top ten percent of people went to university and yet we still had teachers, nurses and every other job that for some reason needs a degree now. And a welder could earn a wage decent enough to buy an average house and support an entire family.

    We also had free education training and grants for living expenses for students. Today that training means a huge amount of debt. I am a firm believer in that we should be investing a lot more into education. There is a conspiracy theory that the Tories deliberately do not invest in education because the more educated are not voting Tory anymore. This is born from the report created in 2005 " DIRECT DEMOCRACY: An Agenda for a New Model Party". which states:

    The decline in Conservative support has been particularly marked among the most educated. This is not always obvious since more education is associated with higher income, and higher income is still (just) associated with stronger Conservative support. However, other factors being held constant, the more educationally qualified someone is, the less likely he or she is to support the Conservatives. This is a problem to the extent that the more educated are likelier to vote, and are often influential in leading the opinion of others. It is also, of course, a problem in a country where nearly half of young people are now going to university.

    The list of authors at the end will interest you also.

    Michael Gove was elected MP for Surrey Heath in 2005 and is a columnist for The Times.

    Danny Kruger is a leader writer for The Daily Telegraph and was formerly a policy adviser to the Conservative Party and Director of Studies at the Centre for Policy Studies

    Kwasi Kwarteng is a financier, former Conservative candidate for Brent East and a Harvard Kennedy scholar.

    Jeremy Hunt was elected MP for South West Surrey in 2005 and is the founder of a publishing business

    As for the wage this purely down to the government’s attacks on union organisations and how they are governed. Skilled workers are still highly paid though. Thatcher got rid of the shipyards. Welders are a dime a dozen (speaking as a welder, I know this for fact). Try to get a plumber, electrician or joiner on the cheap. We do not invest in trade skills anymore. We had government funding for companies to take on apprentices. This used to cover all the costs for an apprentice. An apprentice was cheap free labour. Now they are a cost with huge liabilities attached.

    Don’t act surprised when an entire generation has been brought up with the mantra “work hard and you can achieve anything you want!”, and then act surprised that they don’t want to have kids after working seven years for a worthless degree, no high skilled job role to move in to and a pile of debt before they’ve even started work.

    There are more people going to university now than there was 50 years ago. This is has no credence at all.

    I strongly suggest you take the time to do some critical thinking on your beliefs.

    • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
      1·
      11 months ago

      I strongly suggest that you make sure there’s some sort of credence to your opening paragraph before you go on to make consecutive ones that appear discretided by association.

      “Often, couples with lower level of education have three, four or more children. This is linked to an increase in ‘multipartner fertility’, or, having a child with more than one partner. Highly educated men and women are more likely to have exactly two children”

      https://fluxconsortium.fi/the-highly-educated-often-have-two-children-childlessness-and-high-numbers-of-children-more-commonly-seen-among-low-and-medium-educated-persons/#:~:text=Often%2C couples with lower level,to have exactly two children.

      • Syldon@feddit.ukEnglish
        1·
        11 months ago

        Bugger me you must have hunted high and low for that one.

        Great except it is Finland and Sweden based. This is a UK forum based on the UK. There are people in Africa that are under educated and breed like rabbits. What has this to do with the UK?

          • Syldon@feddit.ukEnglish
            1·
            11 months ago

            The study ends in 1969. This is based on people aged 50 and above. This is not relevant to the kids of today. The cost of living crisis is now. Kids are not having kids because they are really struggling to live.

            There are some huge caveats missed in that study. It is akin to stating people who eat ice cream are more likely to get sun burned. There is not enough correlation between the stats of education level and child birth. They only suggest that is the case. In this era education was free. If a woman was not rearing kids, then education was at your disposal. Now it is not. Having kids stops education dead in the water for a lot of kids, because now it is a debt trap.

            Again critical thinking goes a long way.

              • Syldon@feddit.ukEnglish
                11·
                11 months ago

                Mate give it up.

                The article is 20 years old. It misses a massive point. Kids are struggling enough today without families. Birth control is better understood now than it ever has been in the past. Do you even read the news out side of the Tory media?

                Being poor means less chance at education, being poor means you cannot afford a family, and will actively look to stop having kids. It is a consequence of not having the finances to do other stuff, like pay for an education, that makes the stats skewed. Having an education gives better access to better financial rewards from employment, which enabled you to give a child a better chance at stability. The prevalence of being childless is not a consequence of being under educated; it is purely down to the fact that the Tories have turned the screw to much on the least fortunate in the UK.

                Again Ice cream does not give you sunburn. It is just that more people eat it on hot days.

                I think, where we both agree is that we need better education across the country to give kids a better chance. The Tories have demolished funding for schools in the north of England. It needs rectifying. This is only one of the many other things the Tories have demolished in the last 14 years.

                • XIIIesq@lemmy.world
                  11·
                  11 months ago

                  I understand your point and I don’t contest it. But to claim that there is no correlation between education and the number of kids you have and to claim that it isn’t least partly causative is denial.

                  If you came out of uni with thousands of pounds worth of debt, 7 years behind others who have already joined the work force, no high skilled job to move in to, not married because you were focusing on your studies and unable to afford a house, having kids would probably be quite far down your priorities list.

                  You might be the sort of pendant that says “it’s not the fall that kills you, it’s the sudden stop!”

                  • Syldon@feddit.ukEnglish
                    11·
                    11 months ago

                    Actually, It is the sudden strop that kills you, or at the very least hitting something that slows you on the way down. Having no kids is a symptom not a cause, and education would help alleviate that. Demonising those who are less well is a blight in this country that needs to stop.