MPs call for '32% salary increase'

Why do MP's need housing in london anyway?
They already have the worlds most luxurious hostel maybe if all MP's were as down to earth as these guys
fNuVb.jpg


The country could be saving a lot of money

That's the House of Lords they do their duty for a small daily allowance and have been the only bit of the Establishment reigning in the excesses of the Government over the last 10 years.
 
Northern Irish riots over Union flag as a prysm over politics and deprivation;

bothered.png


"UK" English riots over shooting as prysm over politics and deprivation*;

whassupk.png


The Irony of being a zealot for a Parliament and Union that cares little about you other than platitudes and soundbites.
 
so an anoymous survey goes to MP's asking what they think they should be paid. They say about 30% more than they are on and everybody is going off on one..
If somebody gave me an anonymous survey asking me how much I should get paid, I think I would put at least 30% more..
Who honestly wouldn't on here?
This is a nothing event that has been manipulated by the press...
 
The abuse of the expense system in the past is an excellent reason to increase their salary and reduce their expenses and benefits accordingly.
 
To join in the debate... they are underpaid considering the responsibility they have. The people who decide how my taxes are spent, control the country's security in the world, look after the policing and health service and are responsible for the economy, which dictates how much I get paid, should be of the very highest calibre.

For the very best people you must pay them accordingly..
 
They should be higher paid.

Unfortunately most of the British public are thick and can't stand the thought of people doing very important jobs in the public eye getting paid well with public money. So for political reasons the system was set up so they had a lower than adequate headline figure as a salary to appease the public whilst giving them generous expenses to make up for the shortfall. That then lead to that latter system being abused.

If we as a society could just accept they should be paid a higher wage, they could then have a modest and strict expenses system but as I said, politicians are too scared of the Tabloids saying stuff like "MPs on £80k a year whilst a nurse only gets £30k it's not fair etc etc".

MPs do a lot less for the people than nurses, so perhaps MPs should be on £30k and nurses on £80k :p
 
I think I should be paid more as an I.T. professional working for the government.... but it doesn't meant I'm gonna get it.
 
How come you get to keep the DLA if you work, do you have a little part time job or somthing?
Eligibility

DLA is restricted to people who fall into all of the in the following categories:

They must ordinarily be resident and present in the UK
They must meet the rules concerning age: typically they must be under 65 when they claim;[2] the lower age limit depends on which component they are claiming
They must not be living in certain types of residential accommodation
They must have had a disability for at least 3 months, and expect it to continue for at least six more months
They must have care and/or mobility needs.

Individuals can qualify for DLA whether or not they are working. Earnings do not affect the amount of DLA received. People who are terminally ill typically qualify for the highest rate of Care component of DLA under what is termed "special rules".
 
Earnings do not affect the amount of DLA received[/B]

That's not necessarily true, it depends what group you qualify for, either the contribution group or the income related group (if you haven't made the necessarily NI contributions to qualify for the former).

Or at least it used to be true last month, because I can't find much about it on the net to back me up :p

This probably has something to do with it:

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/policy/disability/personal-independence-payment/
 
Last edited:
That's an unrealistic proposition. The advantage of free movement and capitalism is you can say 'Go elsewhere' when you want more money. There's only one lot of MP's in the UK so they can't. But do you really want a race to the bottom for the people who bring in the law for this country? Would we not want to have higher and higher wages to attract the very best this country has to offer ensuring the legislation going through is being thought out to a higher standard?

I don't know about you but I'd rather someone became an MP because they wanted to be a public servant and do good for the country, not because of the big fat cheque the position comes with.
 
I don't know about you but I'd rather someone became an MP because they wanted to be a public servant and do good for the country, not because of the big fat cheque the position comes with.

Which brings us back to the point that if you pay too low the only people who will become MPs are those that are independently wealthy or are supported by other means. Not because they are the only people that are altruistic but they will be the only people that can actually afford the cost of doing the job.
 
89-90k for the pay

No expenses claimable except travel

A limit on how long you can work in government, much like we have with how long you can serve as prime minster.

They are more than welcome to own 2nd or 3rd homes. They pay for it with their own money.
 
That's not necessarily true, it depends what group you qualify for, either the contribution group or the income related group (if you haven't made the necessarily NI contributions to qualify for the former).

Or at least it used to be true last month, because I can't find much about it on the net to back me up :p

This probably has something to do with it:

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/policy/disability/personal-independence-payment/

sounds like your talking about ESA? and DLA isnt PIP yet
 
Back
Top Bottom