Who the hell wrote this? Emphasis mine.
After leaving government, which he described as a “cruel mistress”, Freeman wrote in his blog that he now had the “greatest freedom of all – to speak and write and talk openly about what I’ve learnt”.
On top of his MP’s salary of £86,584, he is now also free to take on lucrative second jobs, subject to the approval of the anti-corruption watchdog, the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments.
So which is it?
-
He hasn’t left government, so he can still draw his salary. Another job would be a second job.
-
He has left government, and inexplicably is still getting his salary despite being unemployed. Another job would be his first job.
-
He has left government and isn’t getting his salary. Another job would be his first job.
Which is it? I want to know exactly which lies I’m being told.
He has left his post of Minister. He still is a Member of Parliament (MP). So now that he has less responsibilities, he can find another job to get more money, subject to approval.
I’m not sure why being MP of the ruling party isn’t considered being part of the government. It might be a UK thing?
Ministers, also known as front benchers, are MPs which hold a portfolio in addition to representing constituents. You might have a minister for defence, a minister for education, a treasurer, etc. that minister is then the one responsible for working directly with the relevant department (e.g. department of education).
Edit: oops, just realised you understand this, and this should’ve been a reply to the parent comment. Oh well.
