MP's to get 10% pay rise, back-dated to May.

People didn't want MPs to decide their own pay anymore, so it was inevitable this was going to happen.

Idiot hypocrisy of the typical British voter.
 
While we mock them, often with justification, I don't believe their pay is too high. Would love to know how it compares to other countries.

The pm is on £160k give or take!
 
cambsno said:
While we mock them, often with justification, I don't believe their pay is too high. Would love to know how it compares to other countries.

The pm is on £160k give or take!
Click to expand...
Plus Expenses. (see what I did there)
 
cambsno said:
While we mock them, often with justification, I don't believe their pay is too high. Would love to know how it compares to other countries.
The pm is on £160k give or take!
Click to expand...
I remember hearing that government ministers in Singapore earn c. $1m. It was done to discourage corruption - and it appears to have worked, seeing how Singapore has shot up the corruption charts (low corruption at the top).

MPs salaries compare quite poorly with those of barristers, senior accountants, company directors etc. Ministers and the PM's aren't even close to company board members/CEOs.

This can be seen as a good thing or a bad thing, depending on your mindset, but that's no doubting that a career in UK politics is not how to make big bucks... unless you use your contacts to lobby/write your memoirs after you retire.
 
I think its a reasonable salary.
quite a few of them could earn much more in business.
 
Mr Bump said:
I think its a reasonable salary.
quite a few of them could earn much more in business.
Click to expand...
Many of them already do.

I also think the salary is an issue, they should get paid well or at least what they could get elsewhere BUT the issue is timing of the increase when other public sector workers are getting much less of an increase. I'm amazed that the body setting the recommendations doesn't take this into consideration.
 
drounding said:
Many of them already do.

I also think the salary is an issue, they should get paid well or at least what they could get elsewhere BUT the issue is timing of the increase when other public sector workers are getting much less of an increase. I'm amazed that the body setting the recommendations doesn't take this into consideration.
Click to expand...
I think what's been taken into consideration is that when they set their own pay, increases were very small as it was seen as politically bad to award themelves rises similar to those given out to head teachers or London underground drivers. The independent pay review body saw that their salary hadn't kept up and did one big rise to try to redress it. At least that's my take on it.
 
Mr Bump said:
I think its a reasonable salary.
quite a few of them could earn much more in business.
Click to expand...
And quite a few of them could never earn so much in the private sector. Just like union reps.
 
dejongj said:
And quite a few of them could never earn so much in the private sector. Just like union reps.
Click to expand...
If an elected official is a useless muppet, that reflects worse on the voters than the candidate.
 
Llamaman said:
If an elected official is a useless muppet, that reflects worse on the voters than the candidate.
Click to expand...
Fair point but the old saying
you can fool some of the people ....
(Just long enough to win an election ;) )
 
Llamaman said:
If an elected official is a useless muppet, that reflects worse on the voters than the candidate.
Click to expand...
In principle I agree, in reality let's face it a lot of them wouldn't know the difference.

Another reality and decision we surely make all the time ourselves. Is it worth my while to do this job or shall I get someone cheaper than me to do it for me ;)
 
Cobra said:
I've been here a fair few years so I must be doing something right :p
Click to expand...

Of course, some mods were selected on merit, others as a punnishment (sic)!
 
Nod said:
Of course, some mods were selected on merit, others as a punnishment (sic)!
Click to expand...
As I've said a fair few times, its the poacher turned gamekeeper scenario :D

Oh and they needed a whipping boy when things went wrong too ;)
 
Higher salary yes but more cuts in expenses, smaller pension contribution, reduction in what they get when they lose their seat, nothing if they stand down and all future rises the average of public sector rises. Overall MP salary/expenses/pension etc bill remains the same.
 
Bloody good luck to them.
I bet no one here would turn it down.
Also, it appears a few of them accept the raise, but donate the difference to charity.
Can't remember who (it was in the news this morning), but I'm sure Google will reward those who care :-)
 
None of them can turn it down it's automatic. However all 56 SNP MPs are donating their raises to charity.
 
viv1969 said:
I bet no one here would turn it down.
Click to expand...
Well I'd certainly be embarrassed if I got 10% and the rest of my co-workers ( read country)
were getting circa 1%.

I said embarrassed, I didn't say I'd turn it down though :D
 
Cobra said:
Well I'd certainly be embarrassed if I got 10% and the rest of my co-workers ( read country)
were getting circa 1%.

I said embarrassed, I didn't say I'd turn it down though :D
Click to expand...

I'm damn sure none of them would be talking about turning it down, or donating it to charity, if they thought there was any way to keep it secret in the interests of 'national security'...;)
 
Steep said:
None of them can turn it down it's automatic. However all 56 SNP MPs are donating their raises to charity.
Click to expand...

As do many others.
 
Steep said:
None of them can turn it down it's automatic. However all 56 SNP MPs are donating their raises to charity.
Click to expand...
I'd have been more impressed with them if they'd donated anything over minimum or average wage, their choice. Otherwise it's just political posturing.
 
dod said:
I'd have been more impressed with them if they'd donated anything over minimum or average wage, their choice. Otherwise it's just political posturing.
Click to expand...

I agree that making a big song and dance over donating the raise amount is political posturing, but donating everything over minimum wage? Why? Do you?
 
This donating the 10% rise to charity stuff, are they doing it every month for the rest of their natural lives or maybe just for one month until we've all forgotten about this story and then they can rub their hands in glee and start spending it.
I know where my money is.
</jaded cynic/realist>
 
viv1969 said:
I agree that making a big song and dance over donating the raise amount is political posturing, but donating everything over minimum wage? Why? Do you?
Click to expand...

No, but I'm not claiming to be some champion of the working class.

The point is if they think the raise is unjustified why do they think the pre-raise salary is acceptable? It's still far higher than average or minimum. Exactly what arbitrary level of salary (and/or) increase is acceptable? Will they do the same thing next year? If not, why not? They're just another bunch of self serving hypocrites. I think that about all of them, not just the SNP.
 
I personally think that wanting to become a politician should rule a person out from ever actually becoming one :-)
 
I'm always amused by people who go on about how MPs get paid so much for doing so little... and yet don't stand for election themselves.

I think it's a sh*tty, underpaid job and you couldn't beg me to do it.
 
DorsetDude said:
This donating the 10% rise to charity stuff, are they doing it every month for the rest of their natural lives or maybe just for one month until we've all forgotten about this story and then they can rub their hands in glee and start spending it.
I know where my money is.
</jaded cynic/realist>
Click to expand...
Yeah, like the MPs who avoided CGT by 'flipping' their homes (which there is nothing wrong with anyway) who posted a cheque (in front of a camera of course) to HMRC for the avoided tax.
The unpublished story, of course, is that they probably (*) didn't amend their returns, so HMRC would have just repaid the cheque a few weeks later.


(*) At least one MP was asked, but refused to answer the question. Draw your own conclusion.
 
Llamaman said:
(*) At least one MP was asked, but refused to answer the question. Draw your own conclusion.
Click to expand...
The law makers are like programmers, they always leave a little back door ( read loop hole) and know how to expliot it ;)
 
Cobra said:
The law makers are like programmers, they always leave a little back door ( read loop hole) and know how to expliot it ;)
Click to expand...
I'm a programmer and leave my back door out of this! A man's back door is his own private kingdom, I shall defend it with my life.
 
Llamaman said:
I'm always amused by people who go on about how MPs get paid so much for doing so little... and yet don't stand for election themselves.

I think it's a sh*tty, underpaid job and you couldn't beg me to do it.
Click to expand...
Exactly my thoughts, the hours are too long, the fall too great about nothing, and the remuneration is far too little.
 
Didn't Enoch Powell decline salary increases until the next general election, so that his constituents could decide whether he should continue to represent them at the new level?
 
MartynK said:
Didn't Enoch Powell decline salary increases until the next general election, so that his constituents could decide whether he should continue to represent them at the new level?
Click to expand...
But that was at a time when MPs chose their own salary levels - it made sense for MPs to be held accountable for that.
 
Llamaman said:
But that was at a time when MPs chose their own salary levels - it made sense for MPs to be held accountable for that.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know that, but I haven't heard of any other MPs doing this?
 
MartynK said:
Yes, I know that, but I haven't heard of any other MPs doing this?
Click to expand...
Because in the modern climate it would be misleading.

To say "I won't accept the pay rise for this parliament but will if I'm re-elected", it creates the impression that you are holding yourself accountable for the pay rise decision - which is misleading as it wasn't your decision at all.

It also creates an uncomfortable position where better-off MPs (who can afford to work for less - or nothing) can refuse their salary as political stunt to politically embarrass MPs who are less well-off and so less able to follow suit. The last thing we want is more independently wealthy MPs, isn't it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top