MPs 10% pay rise to go through

[Zamo]

If we want more talented and less career-politicians than this is a move that should be welcomed. Long term it is untenable to keep rewarding MPs less than many other people.

 

Exactly.

 

The whole system needs to be completely overhauled, from top to bottom. It's still essentially the same as it was in Victorian times. There is no need to have all the MPs all in one parliament building every day, just do the debates via Skype and save millions if not billions.

 

My bold - I've done a conference call before with 10 people and it was a nightmare. Can't imagine trying it with 650!

[iansheff]

Doesn't your heart just bleed for those poor MPs that have to watch the pennies on over £90,000 a year. It must be hell living in a £700,000 house and having a spouse who is a solicitor, cant be much money going into that household. I don't know how they will manage.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/furious-voters-say-tory-mp-6090098

[mattleonard]

cant see why public sector gets 1% and mps get 10% - makes next to no sense?

 

Well, for one thing, such a comparison makes no sense if it's not related to any historical context, such as this for instance.

 

The longer that, having set-up an independent body for MPs pay, we ignore their findings, the longer it becomes a means of MPs pulling political gimmicks like publicly donating it to charity rather than accepting their pay to do an honest days work.

 

There are people in this thread opposing the pay rise, who are suggesting restrictions to prevent people standing for parliament before they've done a certain period of work outside parliament. Aside from how undemocratic that is, it conflicts with their own principle - currently pay not keeping pace with the market skews parliament towards the landed gentry with their independent income, rather than providing a more level playing field which might increase the number of MPs with outside experience. It also ignores history, which shows that outside experience isn't necessarily a big indicator of quality - Pitt the Younger was one of our greatest prime ministers, taking office at age 24, and ignores the possibility of people growing up with a sense of civic responsibility, rather than deciding to turn their hand to it once they've run out of anything else to do. Anti-MP snobbery is very trendy, but it is still snobbery.

[alchemist]

It seems that now they are desperate for every penny, literally!!!

 

Perhaps they should now be banned from having ANY second third or fourth jobs, after all they should be able to cope with 74k and expenses so any more is just pure greed

[newcomer01]

It seems that now they are desperate for every penny, literally!!!

 

Perhaps they should now be banned from having ANY second third or fourth jobs, after all they should be able to cope with 74k and expenses so any more is just pure greed

 

I started a thread last year about M.P`s with having secondary jobs and the debacle with expenses .As far as I am concerned ,it should be compulsory.

[Longcol]

Pleasing to see half the local MP's are following the SNP example and donating their rise to charity.

 

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/half-of-south-yorkshire-s-mps-pledge-to-help-charities-with-ten-per-cent-pay-rise-1-7369199

[alchemist]

Pleasing to see half the local MP's are following the SNP example and donating their rise to charity.

 

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/half-of-south-yorkshire-s-mps-pledge-to-help-charities-with-ten-per-cent-pay-rise-1-7369199

 

Only half though

[mattleonard]

Pleasing to see half the local MP's are following the SNP example and donating their rise to charity.

 

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/half-of-south-yorkshire-s-mps-pledge-to-help-charities-with-ten-per-cent-pay-rise-1-7369199

 

It's not pleasing at all, it's the most cynical, disingenuous stunt that they've pulled in a long while.

[alchemist]

It's not pleasing at all, it's the most cynical, disingenuous stunt that they've pulled in a long while.

 

Why? Because its shown the rest of them as the money grabbing hypocrites they really are?

[mattleonard]

Why? Because its shown the rest of them as the money grabbing hypocrites they really are?

 

It's done no such thing. Paul Blomfeld says in the article:

 

I give a significant sum to good causes each month. Now I’ll give more.”

 

So now he's ditched that giving privately, instead opting for using his charity to score political points against his fellow MPs, who themselves may already also be giving privately and might well end up giving more as a result of receiving a pay rise.

 

Not just that, but he and the others are doing their job to make sure that MPs pay continues to be a political football for years to come, and by lowering the quality of MPs we get in the future. In every other job, people's salaries are set by their employers and they then take it home and do what they please with it; they are not judged on whether or not they themselves decide to accept it all, or how big a fuss they make about how much of it they are going to give to charity or not. We've finally got close to having a decent system for MPs (with the employers being represented by IPSA) and the MPs are all turning it into a complete farce.