Mp pay goes up but expenses are curbed, Fair?

[sgtkate]

I have long believed that we do not pay our MPs enough. If you consider what a CEO of a FTSE 500 company earns and how much comparable responsibility an MP has, I think they are hugely underpaid.

 

Pay them £200k a year but ban them from holding any other paid position while they are an MP are for 1 year after they leave. They may not sit on any boards whether paid or not and they may not invest any money outside of parliament pensions, ISA etc. Currently they are paid too little so MPs seek 'top-ups' through ethically dubious positions outside of their MP work. Both Labour and Tories have a large number of MP who sit on the boards of private healthcare companies and to me this is a huge conflict of interests.

 

While we are vaguely on it, I also believe that all campaign funds should also come from the public purse (some algorithm based on number of votes at the last election, number of MPs, number of candidates due to stand - perhaps deposits needed for totally new candidates to stop this being abused similar to now). Entertaining both the unions for labour and big businesses for the Tories is another massive conflict of interests. Theres no such thing as a free lunch so who would a business give money to the Tories if there was nothing in it for them? Same with the unions and Labour. We do not want to become America where only the richest and most corrupt get into power.

[Bonzo77]

I have 2 NHS nurses and 1 senior NHS mental health worker in my direct family (sisters in law), plus a senior NHS admin manager for a neighbour (and very good friend), plus a few NHS consultants for friends and acquaintances, besides the volumes of NHS-employed bods throughout our executive estate working at the local hospital. And we socialise with all of them very regularly, have done so for years.

 

Not seen or heard any of them complain about cuts or capped pay rises, nor seen or heard them reduce the shopping/going out/holidays.

 

But I have seen quite a number of new -64 and -15 -plated cars on the drives of their executive 4-bed detached houses (and these are not those of the consultants, who all live in the nice sticks around Retford/Gainsborough), so there's obviously a lot of NHS-sponsored leases expiring cotemporously.

 

I'm not jealous of them at all btw, they all graft for theirs and I'm in the same enviable situation (minus the new-ish cars ) as them and graft for mine. But I can't objectively feel sorry for people who are obviously well-paid for their skills.

 

Now this is all anecdotal an'all, and maybe there's been a raft of passings and inheritances, or lottery windfalls or what-have-you (but not from those above I know personally)...but, you know, about "soaking it up and taking it in"? Maybe have a little cop on.

 

2 of my best friends work for the NHS. One is a midwife, she was on the picket lines fighting for her capped 1% pay rise! I'm not saying that they're living on the breadline, but she's a single parent with a mortgage and she can't afford any of the luxuries you mentioned. But that's besides the point, we're taking about MP's and their rises and how it compares to the rest of the hard working public service staff. Another good friend of mine is a fire fighter. We all know how well the government has looked after them recently! Politicians get paid far too much for the work that they do.

 

---------- Post added 18-05-2015 at 12:27 ----------

 

I have long believed that we do not pay our MPs enough. If you consider what a CEO of a FTSE 500 company earns and how much comparable responsibility an MP has, I think they are hugely underpaid.

 

Pay them £200k a year but ban them from holding any other paid position while they are an MP are for 1 year after they leave. They may not sit on any boards whether paid or not and they may not invest any money outside of parliament pensions, ISA etc. Currently they are paid too little so MPs seek 'top-ups' through ethically dubious positions outside of their MP work. Both Labour and Tories have a large number of MP who sit on the boards of private healthcare companies and to me this is a huge conflict of interests.

 

While we are vaguely on it, I also believe that all campaign funds should also come from the public purse (some algorithm based on number of votes at the last election, number of MPs, number of candidates due to stand - perhaps deposits needed for totally new candidates to stop this being abused similar to now). Entertaining both the unions for labour and big businesses for the Tories is another massive conflict of interests. Theres no such thing as a free lunch so who would a business give money to the Tories if there was nothing in it for them? Same with the unions and Labour. We do not want to become America where only the richest and most corrupt get into power.

 

Why would you compare an MP's salary to a CEO's salary? Especially with the amount of income inequality in the UK at the moment?!

[sgtkate]

2 of my best friends work for the NHS. One is a midwife, she was on the picket lines fighting for her capped 1% pay rise! I'm not saying that they're living on the breadline, but she's a single parent with a mortgage and she can't afford any of the luxuries you mentioned. But that's besides the point, we're taking about MP's and their rises and how it compares to the rest of the hard working public service staff. Another good friend of mine is a fire fighter. We all know how well the government has looked after them recently! Politicians get paid far too much for the work that they do.

 

---------- Post added 18-05-2015 at 12:27 ----------

 

 

Why would you compare an MP's salary to a CEO's salary? Especially with the amount of income inequality in the UK at the moment?!

 

I also support wage ratios but still an MP is v poorly paid even if you went back to pay ratios in the 1970s, CEOs would earn 15 times their average worker putting them on around £350k which to me would be reasonable and fair for the PM, slightly less for Deputy PM and leader of opposition, cabinet minister and shadow cabinet a bit less again, then sliding scale down to backbenchers. If you want GOOD MPs you have to pay for them. I would love to see top business people, doctors, lawyers, IT consultants etc. all standing for election. They have far better understanding of 'life' outside Westminster, would bring expertise in their field to Westminster and would create a more diverse parliament. But they aren't going to come for free.

[ubermaus]

They get paid about just right. Quite a lot of costs involved with being an MP. I don't think they should get paid like CEO's or be compared with the private sector...it should be on par with other high level civil servants.

Between 70k and 100k is about right.

 

---------- Post added 18-05-2015 at 12:49 ----------

 

I also support wage ratios but still an MP is v poorly paid even if you went back to pay ratios in the 1970s, CEOs would earn 15 times their average worker putting them on around £350k which to me would be reasonable and fair for the PM, slightly less for Deputy PM and leader of opposition, cabinet minister and shadow cabinet a bit less again, then sliding scale down to backbenchers. If you want GOOD MPs you have to pay for them. I would love to see top business people, doctors, lawyers, IT consultants etc. all standing for election. They have far better understanding of 'life' outside Westminster, would bring expertise in their field to Westminster and would create a more diverse parliament. But they aren't going to come for free.

 

Remember Kate, a lot have second jobs or businesses. They do alright out of politics and the public purse and get plenty of flexibility.

 

This is all cost to the tax payer, I dont think 350k would go down too well!

[Cyclone]

Democratic process?? I dont recall a DEMOCRATIC process. After all how can anything that puts someone in charge when over 60% voted against them be called democratic

 

When there are multiple parties in an election and 1 of them has to be in charge, it's highly unlikely that they will have 60% of the vote in favour of them isn't it. Basic maths tells us that.

 

Would you see us without a government because of the way the vote was split?

[sgtkate]

They get paid about just right. Quite a lot of costs involved with being an MP. I don't think they should get paid like CEO's or be compared with the private sector...it should be on par with other high level civil servants.

Between 70k and 100k is about right.

 

---------- Post added 18-05-2015 at 12:49 ----------

 

 

Remember Kate, a lot have second jobs or businesses. They do alright out of politics and the public purse and get plenty of flexibility.

 

This is all cost to the tax payer, I dont think 350k would go down too well!

 

Read my previous post where I said they should be banned from 2nd jobs completely while they are an MP and should be restricted for a time afterwards so they cannot do a 'Tony Blair'.

 

Do you not wonder what the cost to electorate is by having our MPs under the control of either the unions or businesses both who have a totally selfish reason for investing?

[L00b]

2 of my best friends work for the NHS. One is a midwife, she was on the picket lines fighting for her capped 1% pay rise! I'm not saying that they're living on the breadline, but she's a single parent with a mortgage and she can't afford any of the luxuries you mentioned.

And is that solely because she's not paid enough, or is that because of life choices which she must assume?

 

Next neighbour one door down is high-up national education (deputy school head or somesuch). Single mom with 2 kids, hubby kicked out or done a runner (don't know, as I don't do goss) last year. She's had to get rid of the Range, but manages a 4 bed detached and a -64 plate big mini (All4 diesel) just fine, by the looks. Truth be told, there are days I wonder if I'm the only private sector bod on the entire estate!

 

An employer, public or private, cannot objectively be held responsible for how an employee manages their personal finances.

But that's besides the point, we're taking about MP's and their rises and how it compares to the rest of the hard working public service staff.

You brought in nurses and the NHS.

Another good friend of mine is a fire fighter. We all know how well the government has looked after them recently!

My father-in-law is a full career firefighter, now retired. Don't go there as well, is my friendly advice to you

Politicians get paid far too much for the work that they do.

You missed 'elected' in that opinion, I think. Now, have you ever looked into what an MP does at the coalface, day-in, day-out?

Why would you compare an MP's salary to a CEO's salary? Especially with the amount of income inequality in the UK at the moment?!

MP pay is £67k (or even £74k now), the median CEO pay is at £99k (source). Not all CEOs are FTSE 100 bods at £4m a year, far from it.

 

MPs are underpaid, no doubt. But (public-) pay is not what MPs (those I've met, here and elsewhere) are really after. Influence/power is.

Edited May 18, 2015 by L00b

[the_bloke]

Hello Mr Sheeple! Welcome to the herd! Shut up and get in line!!

 

Sorry, too busy to fret about conspiracy theories and happily increasing my quality of life instead. I got a 9% pay raise last month, I bet you hate me for that.

 

Where is your evidence that the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority is not independent? Apart from the fact you are not part of it?

[ubermaus]

Read my previous post where I said they should be banned from 2nd jobs completely while they are an MP and should be restricted for a time afterwards so they cannot do a 'Tony Blair'.

 

Do you not wonder what the cost to electorate is by having our MPs under the control of either the unions or businesses both who have a totally selfish reason for investing?

 

Pay them £200k a year but ban them from holding any other paid position while they are an MP are for 1 year after they leave. They may not sit on any boards whether paid or not and they may not invest any money outside of parliament pensions, ISA etc. Currently they are paid too little so MPs seek 'top-ups' through ethically dubious positions outside of their MP work. Both Labour and Tories have a large number of MP who sit on the boards of private healthcare companies and to me this is a huge conflict of interests.

 

Yeah, I partially agree. The healthcare board issue needs sorting. However, I disagree with banning them from taking a second job aslong is its not a conflict of interest. Why shouldnt they work and pay tax and use that real world experience to benefit constituents?

 

It's a lot of justification to raise MP wage levels to such a high level. It becomes more of a 'job' than a public service if we compare to private sector.

The PM is on less than 150k.

 

---------- Post added 18-05-2015 at 13:09 ----------

 

suppose what im trying to say is being an MP is a public service position. They are our servants, so what they 'do' is not privy to the same sort of pay mechanisms as private jobs (imo).

[alchemist]

When there are multiple parties in an election and 1 of them has to be in charge, it's highly unlikely that they will have 60% of the vote in favour of them isn't it. Basic maths tells us that.

 

Would you see us without a government because of the way the vote was split?

 

I dont see Germany without a government and they have PR so why would we be different?