M.P's to get 10% rise....

[BobG]

There is another, exceedingly good, reason to pay MP's more than the common herd.

We've seen 'cash for questions' scandals reasonably regularly in recent years. Motivated by greed presumably. If you remove the need for additional income, then bribery, corruption and even crap like the expenses fiddles all go out of the window. Of course, anyone who then dips his snout in the trough again should have the key thrown away.  Personally, I'd go further still. I'd pay them a lot. And I'd ban them from having any second employment of any sort. Get rid of the cozy vested interests. pay a quarter of a million a year. I don't really care. Just make sure the buggers have no reason to be dishonest - in all ways.

BobG

[Mike_F]

Yes I meant to say that in my post too, Bob.

[IC1967]

There is another, exceedingly good, reason to pay MP's more than the common herd.

We've seen 'cash for questions' scandals reasonably regularly in recent years. Motivated by greed presumably. If you remove the need for additional income, then bribery, corruption and even crap like the expenses fiddles all go out of the window. Of course, anyone who then dips his snout in the trough again should have the key thrown away.  Personally, I'd go further still. I'd pay them a lot. And I'd ban them from having any second employment of any sort. Get rid of the cozy vested interests. pay a quarter of a million a year. I don't really care. Just make sure the buggers have no reason to be dishonest - in all ways.

BobG

Just a few comments. Have you heard of paragraphs? Do you know you should start sentences with a capital letter? I thought your were the expert on capital letters. Some of your spacing between sentences leaves a bit to be desired. MP's should be MPs. I could go on.

You do know that we have some female MPs don't you? Or are you being sexist by saying it is only male MPs that have a propensity for wrongdoing?

IC1967

[bobjimwilly]

If you remove the need for additional income, then bribery, corruption and even crap like the expenses fiddles all go out of the window.

I'm sorry Bob but that is a crap load of garbage. In my experience those at the top of the tree who already have power and money usually crave more. Look at FIFA ffs!

[Metalmicky]

Cut out the 'additional' benefits, be they additional housing, administrative staff, stationery, travel etc.  Pay them one figure, say £200-250k a year and say "that's your lot".  Then let them manage their own accounts as they deem fit.  There would be significant savings on the public purse, as you would be able to get rid of dozens of civil servants paid to administer the allowances system and we would not have the need for constant enquiries into MPs financial affairs etc etc - which no doubt costs a few million pounds more...

Whilst the trough is there, we will always have people prepared to dip into it...     

[Glyn_Wigley]

Cut out the 'additional' benefits, be they additional housing, administrative staff, stationery, travel etc.  Pay them one figure, say £200-250k a year and say "that's your lot".  Then let them manage their own accounts as they deem fit.  There would be significant savings on the public purse, as you would be able to get rid of dozens of civil servants paid to administer the allowances system and we would not have the need for constant enquiries into MPs financial affairs etc etc - which no doubt costs a few million pounds more...

Whilst the trough is there, we will always have people prepared to dip into it...     

A lot of MPs have constituencies away from London and do need accommodation in London, which shouldn't be at their expense. However, I'd be in favour of a government owned block of flats that could be custom built for MPs needs (communications, security, etc.). These could be provided free of charge to MPs, however if they didn't want to use them that's up to them but they wouldn't get funding for an alternative.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Glyn

Nice idea but then we complain that our MPs are in a Westminster bubble and never make contact with the outside world. Having them all cooped up in an MPs' tower block would only exacerbate that.

Personally, I'd pay them a lot more than they currently get. I'd give them a flat-rate block expenses grant for office costs and in-London living costs (where they could rent, but not buy, so they make no profit on their London residence).

If they then want to get by with a skeleton office staff and live in a hovel and pocket the rest of the money, then fine. If they can do the and still provide a service, they deserve the money.

With all that, is make it illegal for them to do any outside work. And I would have HUGE prison sentences for anyone who broke the rules.

Destroying faith in democracy is one of the worst crimes there is. A combination of a lascivious press, a moralising, infantile public and some crook MPs genuinely on the make has gone a long way towards doing that. It needs totally sweeping out and a new payment system bringing in from scratch.

[The Red Baron]

BST. I broadly agree with you. I think it is a pity that during the years when the economy was doing well that the issue of MPs pay wasn't sorted out. Instead, they were encouraged to claim spurious expenses to make up the perceived shortfall.

MPs and ministers should be paid more but it is difficult to make that case when they are strict levels of pay restraint.

I do think MPs should be allowed to do some outside work but only if it relates to their profession before they entered parliament. If they get consultancy work or a seat on a board just because they are an MP then that should not be allowed. But allowing them continue their previous work on a limited basis might enable them to remain connected to the  "real world."

[BillyStubbsTears]

TRB

It's because it is a toxic issue for any Govt to take on. The media have a field day with any suggestion that MPs should be paid more and it's that reason why no Govt wants to grasp the nettle.

It's not the only problem like this. We haven't had a re-rating of property values for Council Tax in 25 years and the bands are ridiculously out. But no Govt will address it because SOME people will lose out and they will be plastered all over the papers. Those who win won't be mentioned.

That's what happens when you have a media that is a powerful and controlling of the Govt as ours is. What was the last time that a politician who was prepared to stand up to Murdoch won an election? It's never happened UK-wide in my adult life. And in Scotland, it's no co-incidence that Salmond and Sturgeon are big buddies with Murdoch.

What a country, eh?

[IC1967]

TRB

It's because it is a toxic issue for any Govt to take on. The media have a field day with any suggestion that MPs should be paid more and it's that reason why no Govt wants to grasp the nettle.

It's not the only problem like this. We haven't had a re-rating of property values for Council Tax in 25 years and the bands are ridiculously out. But no Govt will address it because SOME people will lose out and they will be plastered all over the papers. Those who win won't be mentioned.

That's what happens when you have a media that is a powerful and controlling of the Govt as ours is. What was the last time that a politician who was prepared to stand up to Murdoch won an election? It's never happened UK-wide in my adult life. And in Scotland, it's no co-incidence that Salmond and Sturgeon are big buddies with Murdoch.

What a country, eh?

Murdoch doesn't decide who wins elections. He backs whoever is likely to win. Savvy politicians get him on side.

Obvious really.