Should MPs be allowed to have full time employment?
The recent case of Josie Lau revealed the startling discovery that employees holding senior positions in an organisation should carefully review their ability and time commitment if they are to take another important appointment outside their organisation. This is particulary pertinent if both appointments are senior appointments that demand more of their time and effort. A good reference point is an appointment like the President of Aware and a VP position in a big organisation. If such a combination is deemed taxing enough on the appointment holder and to be discouraged, any combination that has more senior appointments than these must be avoided, if not, be disallowed. The rationale of time, commitment and responsibility to wear two such important hats is obvious. Can they really do a good job without compromising on the quality of their work? Unless such a fear is unfounded. Then we look at the job of an MP. Surely this must be at least 10x or 100x more demanding and taxing on the MP than the President of Aware. And what make things worst is that many of the MPs are holding more senior positions than just a VP. Many are CEOs with the responsibilities of the whole organisation. Should the issue of part time MP be reviewed in the light of such concerns? How can such an important appointment be done by part timers?