So no hope from Jeremy either?

Not a set period of course!
Each candidate should be asessed on their merits.Since most have already had jobs anyway it’s a non worry.

I choose not to report yours too trisher so that makes us quits on that score.
I have already commented on the topic, but not to your liking of course.
Corbyn is a wimp of the first order and no doubt will cave in
And not stick to his principles ( being anti EU as he is.)
He is a fence sitter and the worst leader ever of the LP.
Oh how those LP MP’s must regret sticking his name in the ballot.

Most MPs have had other jobs but the number of "professional MPs" is rising at a huge rate. From 3% to over 20% in less than 30years so arguably they will become the majority very soon. Is this really desirable?
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11498660/Revealed-how-many-General-Election-candidates-have-had-real-jobs-and-how-many-are-professional-politicians.html
JF's solution is one way to stop it. If 10 years is wrong should it be longer or shorter or not a set period?
It is something we should be looking at.

GN has asked us to stick to the subject lemon I could I suppose report your various posts. I choose not to. It's not my fault you can't let something go. Or that you have nothing to say on the topic.

Telling a fellow member to ‘get off’ a thread is very much against GN guidelines btw.

I have already said that most MP’s have had jobs before they went into politics, and must because Formby decides that ten years is the optimum choice ( arbitrary!) why should anyone agree with it, or are they all sheep?

I rest my case!

lemon please try to stick to the thread. You do not "know" what I might or might not be aware of as far as any poster is concerned.
If you can't contribute to a thread get off! I take it you haven't any ideas about contributing to a wider range of candidates as MPs?

It’s not strong to kick somebody when they are down, and you know that Annie has had awful things to deal with lately that you and me and anyone else would find just about impossible to deal with.A little humility from you would not come amiss or a little kindness either.
Strong woman indeed!

Tht's OK lemon I'm just a robot (or even a strong woman)

Hardly a compassionate response trisher and rather an emotionally empty sort of reply.Robotic in fact.

I do wonder why it is acceptable for someone to post things which attack my posts without any rational reasons. Still I will continue to ignore them.
If someone has a better idea than JFs for widening the experiences of those standing as MPs would they like to post it.
I do support the 50/50 movement 5050parliament.co.uk

I think one of the problems is that some posters have little or no personal experience of living with mental illness and tend to have sympathetic but over emotional responses to some things. As I was told when I was very young by a professional who was asked "How do you treat someone who is mentally ill?" "Just the same as you would most people most of the time unless they are actively or obviously needing help. They shouldn't be handled with kid gloves"
If someone wants to start a thread on this they could do and I might contribute or not.

Neither is it acceptable for someone who is known to have other problems to be targeted by bullies simply because they may have varying views on subjects, including politics.

Attack the views, not the poster.
Do not post unfounded lies about posters.
Do not twist what posters have said in order to attack.

GNHQ have warned us previously about not making attacks on other posters as we may not know of their state of health - and, if we do, it is even worse to do so.

Good grief, it wasn’t I who brought up my threads , careful, twisting isn’t good for you

Personally I agree with this as far as mental health problems are concerned (and I have lived with real ones most of my life)
What not to use your mental health problems for:
To get extra attention and sympathy

There are unobtrusive ways to bring up the fact that you found something offensive because of the illness you’re struggling with. But using your mental illness as a crutch in conversation to get attention (or even pity) is going too far. If you’re with people that are specifically making themselves available to talk about what’s going on with your anxiety, depression, bipolar disorder, etc. etc., then of course that’s what your conversation will center around. But in the middle of the conversation that is miles away from the subject of you or your mental illness, it shouldn’t be used as an attention grab

It may not be the case, but it does come across as quite deliberate.

Yes, lemon grove, that is exactly what I meant, that other posters think on and reflect on the possible impact of extremely personal, undermining and indeed cruel comments directed at a poster who acknowledges they are struggling.

Yes well said Iam as long as you mean other posters think on before posting and not the person with problems.

well said Iam64.

I agree Jalima1108 and I do think it would need a great deal of consideration but I still think as a concept it has value.

We feminists always had the mantra that "the personal is political"
Believed it in the 70's, believe it now.
I also believe that when posters acknowledge they're being treated for significant physical or mental health problems, it's wise to think on before posting.

JC is a career politician, left wing activist straight into a "union representative job" NUPE, would he have been excluded from being "selected" under the 10 year "rule"?

A good question. I'm not sure it would work - what about those who have worked as researchers in the H of C for 10 years? Would that be counted or disregarded? It doesn't give anyone experience of work outside of politics either.

Most MP’s have had other jobs for quite a while before going into politics.

Not if your walking in the wrong direction

trisher cannot disagree with your post.