MP's - Pay rise

1) They can have the pay, as long as they give up the allowances. After all, they got the allowances to get around not getting pay rises. If they are being paid (say) £100k then they can afford a -ing hotel room now and again. And to pay the staff they employ. Those that don't employ their own family or mistresses anyway.

2) Performance-related rises only. They love to advocate these for the rest of the public sector, but always seem to miss themselves off the list.

+1 my MP doesn't bloody need a second home in London he's in Surrey FFS 35mins on the train you lazy ****
 
2) Performance-related rises only. They love to advocate these for the rest of the public sector, but always seem to miss themselves off the list.

How exactly do you measure their performance though? How about a bonus for every new law they write? Or commissions based on the amount of tax revenue they bring in?
 
If they're working 80 hours a week then I think it's justified. But then you've got to take into account their holidays too, so I think that would push it to 100 hours...
 
I don't think they should get anything as far as I am aware ther are not doing a good job. At most they shoud match inflation which is about 2.8%.
 
If they're working 80 hours a week then I think it's justified. But then you've got to take into account their holidays too, so I think that would push it to 100 hours...

Again lolololololol i work 72 hours a week sometimes,again are you for real man, get a grip.
 
It is very difficult. On the one hand I don't want career politicians who join the party at uni, work as a special advisor etc for a few years then get handed a safe seat to be earning that much money. On the other hand we have to attract top quality people in - and £67k just isn't going to do that. We need captains of industry as MPs, and at my work even middle ranking engineers make more than that (with OT).
 
It is very difficult. On the one hand I don't want career politicians who join the party at uni, work as a special advisor etc for a few years then get handed a safe seat to be earning that much money. On the other hand we have to attract top quality people in - and £67k just isn't going to do that. We need captains of industry as MPs, and at my work even middle ranking engineers make more than that (with OT).


You miss the point, name me one MP that is top quality, I have yet to see one MP who does not tell lies to safeguard their seat.
 
It is very difficult. On the one hand I don't want career politicians who join the party at uni, work as a special advisor etc for a few years then get handed a safe seat to be earning that much money. On the other hand we have to attract top quality people in - and £67k just isn't going to do that. We need captains of industry as MPs, and at my work even middle ranking engineers make more than that (with OT).

This is just horse **** you don't need to attract people to politics with money it should be done for public service, the sacrifice is you could earn more doing something else :rolleyes:
 
This is just horse **** you don't need to attract people to politics with money it should be done for public service, the sacrifice is you could earn more doing something else :rolleyes:

And surely if you're any good at public service then you'd also be good at another job that pays more? Maybe a few people would willingly sacrifice salary, hours and privacy in the name of "public service" but it's not exactly appealing.

It's always amazed me how low the Prime Minister's salary is. I know they earn via other means too but still.
 
I don't see the problem.

Spook, why don't you run to be your local MP if you think you could do a better job for less?


So while other people are taking pay cuts, you think its justified to grab £20,000 as the link says.

To be honest i may one day run for local MP:eek::D, i would be fair and honest.
 
Back
Top Bottom