[TW]Fox;14735922 said:
Unfortunately however eagerness and a will to work for less money and get mud slinged at you in the press doesn't make you the best person for the job.
It may well be worth paying more and getting a better qualified person.
MPs can not afford to cover their costs, says Margaret Beckett
- Thread starter mattheman
- Start date
Unfortunately however eagerness and a will to work for less money and get mud slinged at you in the press doesn't make you the best person for the job.
It may well be worth paying more and getting a better qualified person.
At some point you have to accept the fact that they are not working class people and they are there to run the country, they should be given a Competitive pay.
Would you want the likes of the trade union leaders (eg Jack Jones, Tony Woodley...) to run our country?
And no its not reasonable to expect them to stay in the travel lodge, I would not stay there why should I expect them to?
Oh and 25 pounds per day for food is not much in London.
Last edited:
A travel lodge is not a great place to stay by any means. For one night or two, perhaps, but for 3-4 days a week for potentially 40 weeks a year? That is far from reasonable.
There is quite a compelling argument for increasing MPs pay and reducing their expenses so that they avoid extravagant purchases. Naturally, it isn't going to happen due to knee jerk public outrage.
Last edited:
There is a big bloody block of flats 5 mins walk from westminster full of MPs.
you obviously haven't had to live in one, still for 50-70 a night for a permanent gig you can get something pretty bloody nice in London. It's more than I pay for my decent 2 bed in Hampstead (which is a *GOOD* area).
Just 3 points to make:
1. If they cannot balance their own finances somehow, exactly why should we let them run the country?
2. I've never met, nor heard of a poor politician regardless of their lower, working or upper class status prior to becoming an MP.
1. If they cannot balance their own finances somehow, exactly why should we let them run the country?
2. I've never met, nor heard of a poor politician regardless of their lower, working or upper class status prior to becoming an MP.
1) At what point did they say they cant manage their finances?
2) because most MP's do not just finish uni and say I am going to apply for a job as a MP tomorrow. They have had some sort of other job first.
they aren't
for comparable jobs the pay is very poor ( of course directly comaparable is difficult to judge )
What other job could Prescott get? he was a ships steward and then a union man.
If the difficulty lies in accomodation in London, which is a necessary part of the job, then the employer should provide it. But it should be provided in an efficient manner and not be a means for Mps to permanently obtain free property. Given that there are a significant number of MPs who need to spend a significant amount of time in London, it would make more sense for the state to build or buy suitable accomodation and provide it that way.
This should not be confused with things such as staffing costs for your country estate. That is not the same thing at all.
This should not be confused with things such as staffing costs for your country estate. That is not the same thing at all.
How do you determine the relevant qualifications for being an MP?
Do you know that most of them vote on most things without even knowing what they are voting on or why? That doesn't require much ability.
I think that 3 times the national average salary with genuinely work-related expenses paid is at least adequate for a job that should be motivated mainly by a wish to serve your country.
Can anyone tell me why MPs can't just commute? They receive free 1st class rail tickets and business class air fares, and Britain is a tiny little island. We're not exactly talking about vast distances here, are we?
Even if they needed to stay overnight in London occasionally, I'm sure that the occasional hotel or motel visit would cost the taxpayer far less than the cost of furnishing and subsidising a second home in the UK's most expensive city.
Even if they needed to stay overnight in London occasionally, I'm sure that the occasional hotel or motel visit would cost the taxpayer far less than the cost of furnishing and subsidising a second home in the UK's most expensive city.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Feb 2009
- Posts
- 895
- Location
- Sydney
I don't have a problem with MP's getting their London accomodation paid for them by the taxpayer. However, they should not then be allowed to go and sell the property for a nice big profit when they get turfed out at the next election.
Comparing MP's salaries to the private sector is hardly a good idea.
If you start comparing their salaries then surely you should be comparing their performance as well?
Exactly what qualifications do you need to become an MP and how is your performance monitored?
If you perform poorly do you receive no salary increase and miss out on promotion?
Who exactly are you answerable to when you **** up time after time after time?
If you start comparing their salaries then surely you should be comparing their performance as well?
Exactly what qualifications do you need to become an MP and how is your performance monitored?
If you perform poorly do you receive no salary increase and miss out on promotion?
Who exactly are you answerable to when you **** up time after time after time?