Home » Forums

[MSE Lawrence]

Poll between 18-26 May 2009:

What should we pay our MPs?

Unless you’ve recently been living under a rock, you can't have missed the MP expenses scandal. One argument put forward is MPs aren't paid a wage equivalent to the calibre of people we want to attract.

So forget vitriol for the current lot, which of these is nearest what we should pay our MPs?

Assume there’ll also be legit expenses for office staffing and extra living allowance for those with distant constituencies.

Apologies for any salary inaccuracies below, they're from reliable web sources but of course specifc cases vary widely.

A. Nothing, it should be voluntary. - 9% (873 votes)
B. £11,000/yr (c. Carphone Warehouse staff basic. Source: Guardian) - 2% (225 votes)
C. £25,000/yr (c. London Bus driver salary) - 6% (568 votes)
D. £30,000/yr (c. Uni Lecturer with post doctoral research & experience) - 15% (1492 votes)
E. £49,000/yr (c. London post-natal ward Matron) - 10% (950 votes)
F. £54,000/yr (c. Inspector level Police officer & above) - 11% (1077 votes)
G. £64,766/yr (MP's current salary) - 16% (1561 votes)
H. £80,000/yr (c. Director of efficiency savings, city council, 4-day week) - 11% (1067 votes)
I. £97,000/yr (c. ACA chartered accountant avg) - 4% (442 votes)
J. £103,000/yr (c. District judge's salary) - 6% (549 votes)
K. £110,000/yr (c. Avg family GP salary) - 6% (633 votes)
L. £160,000/yr (c. Weekly salary of Man City striker Robinho) - 1% (137 votes)
M. £172,000/yr (c. High court judge's salary) - 2% (203 votes)
N. £3.5m/yr (c. Top 100 UK company chief exec pay & bonus) - 0% (14 votes)
O. £50m/yr (c. Simon Cowell reported earnings. Source: Forbes.com) - 1% (119 votes)

Total Votes: 9910

Voting has now closed, but you can still click 'post reply' to discuss below. Thanks

Enter e-mail to get it:   View Past Emails, FAQ Privacy Policy

[Flickering Ember]

I'd say C, because for a fair few MPs, it's only a sideline anyway; I knew one who had a full time job paying a good wage (more than £25K) as well as being an MP. This should also help attract candidates who are doing it for the love of their constituency and its constituents rather than those who just see pound signs. I don't tar all MPs with the same brush; I've known some great ones and have even considered running for the position myself at times when particularly fed up with local council problems.

[Pssst]

Peg it at the current level.
do not pay second homes allowance.

HM government to build/lease a purpose made building which will have facilities and rooms similar to a premier inn to provide overnight acc/weekly acc in London.

Pay standard rail fair travel. If MP wants 1st class,he pays the upgrade.
Pay legitimate office running expenses (i.e limited no of staff,equipment etc)
No MP to employ a member of family. Employment opportunities to be advertised in the open market and successful applicant scrutinised to ensure no fiddling.

[Flickering Ember]

I completely agree with all your points, Pssst. I actually don't see why people would be an MP for an area so far from home anyway. I mean if I was going to be an MP, I'd do it for my local community as I'd know them as a resident there anyway. And it would make me more accessible to them. What's the point of an MP for Harrogate living in Harlesden for example?

[Pssst]

Originally Posted by Flickering Ember

I completely agree with all your points, Pssst. I actually don't see why people would be an MP for an area so far from home anyway. I mean if I was going to be an MP, I'd do it for my local community as I'd know them as a resident there anyway. And it would make me more accessible to them. What's the point of an MP for Harrogate living in Harlesden for example?

I agree. MPs should live in or close to areas which they aspire to represent.

[Midas]

Ironically, I would say that their current 'take home' - about £80k on average (£65k basic plus expenses) is about right. This would put them somewhere near a decent university professor, although still well below the average GP, judge, solicitor etc. It would also leave them significantly less well paid than virtually anyone at the BBC.

So give them a pay rise and abolish all expenses, apart from travel between their constituency and London.

[NO-BRAIN]

I'm so unhappy with the way they have conducted themselves and think it's acceptable. I'd struggle to get a stapler through on my expenses at work and yet to be able to claim money and pay their own family etc it's criminal....in my eyes it's little different to someone claiming benefits they are not entitled to and should be punished accordingly.

I'm further annoyed that the week after next I am having to pay out childcare for the day so my daughters school can be used as a polling station. I think we should campaign like in Brewsters Millions and have a 'none of the above' box to show no faith in whichever MP's might win!!

[Bean Counter]

Originally Posted by Pssst

HM government to build/lease a purpose made building which will have facilities and rooms similar to a premier inn to provide overnight acc/weekly acc in London.

Is that not what we are doing at the moment. It's called the Olympic village and will be vacant in the not too distant future with plenty of capacity.

[Saucepot]

I voted A.

If you can afford to do it for nothing, then you will either be an individual of success or sponsered by your socialist brothers.

[Bertie-H]

Unless I am mistaken, aren't MPs - after completing two terms, i.e. 8 to 10 years - already entitled to a very generous pension?

I think we can do without them. All the important decisions are taken by the European Parliament - better keep the MEPs in check! National parliaments have less and less to say about what their countries can do.

Bertie

[bumpoowee]

I actually think they are underpaid, and voted for £80k. But I also think there are far too many of them. If we had around 300 MPs I'd be happy to see them get a 25% pay rise. I don't see why we need 600+ and then hundreds more in the house of lords??

[werdna75]

MPs claim they need paying a fortune so all walks of life can become MPs. Rubbish! They need recompense for the earnings they lose whilst representing our interests in parliament.

Pay an ex teacher a teacher's salary. Pay an ex lawyer a lawyers salary. That's all they were worth before. That's all they needed to live on before they became an MP. Then increase their salaries in line with the pay awards given to those professions.

People shouldn't become MPs to make money. It should be to represent their constituents. It shouldn't be a career it should be a career break, like jury service. Why do we need career politicians anyway?

As for second home allowances; what's wrong with the figure set by Westminster Council for Housing Benefit? That is surely enough to provide a home for someone in the Westminster area? Isn't it?

OK, MP's with extra responsibilities should be paid extra, perhaps in a similar way to teachers. 1 salary point for PPS up to 6 salary points for primeminister?

Outside earnings? Well if you aren't working full time as an MP you don't deserve the full pay of an MP. Let's structure it in the same way as tax credits or the benefits system. An MP loses £x of MP's income for every £1 he earns from outside work.

Fair, probably not. But probably the best way to get honest politicians who are there for the right reason.

I don't want a politician who wants to be a politician. I want a politician who wants to shake up the system, who wants to make my life better, who's not worried about losing his seat at the next election because his party doesn't support him. I want someone who will represent me what ever my polictical beliefs are, I want someone whose not in it for the money but instead for the future of my country. I want someone who will vote for what they think their constituents want and not what their party whip tells them to vote for.

Politics in general needs sorting out, from grass roots up. We as the people need to get more involved. That way our MPs would know what we want and that it isn't what we get given now. We don't get involved because we don't see the point as they rarely listen to what we want and rarely vote for what we want.

[stulynes]

MPs salary hould be linked to the average wage of their consituency (may be a factor of 1.5 or whatever) to give them an incentive to improve job prospects and unemployment issues in their area. Also ministers and shadow cabinet mps should then get an additional wage linked to the national average wage to incentivise national improvement.

[fwog]

MP's should be paid zero. Thats how it was done in the 50's. You worked in much the same way as a union rep. Fighting for what you believed in, as if you didnt get elected, you were wrong. Now, MP's dont give a monkies as theyve got their exorbitant expenses claims to manufacture and ALL their wages seem to be pocket money

[pkempc]

Originally Posted by Pssst

Peg it at the current level.
do not pay second homes allowance.

HM government to build/lease a purpose made building which will have facilities and rooms similar to a premier inn to provide overnight acc/weekly acc in London.

Pay standard rail fair travel. If MP wants 1st class,he pays the upgrade.
Pay legitimate office running expenses (i.e limited no of staff,equipment etc)
No MP to employ a member of family. Employment opportunities to be advertised in the open market and successful applicant scrutinised to ensure no fiddling.

The old GLC town hall - directly opposite parliament - is now a Premier Inn hotel with 312 rooms & next door is the Marriott with 200 rooms.
I'm sure Martin (Our MSE not the speaker !) could get the MP's (who don't have London constituencies) a good deal for four nights a week B&B accommodation ( Friday being POETS day of course ) for the six months of the year that parliament sits.

Each MP should get a capped travel allowance equivalent in value to a years 2nd class rail season ticket from the station closest to their constituency office to london return.
Any work related travel for partners/relatives can come out of that allowance.

All MP's to carry mobile phones with tracking facilities ( like you can get for your kids ) so us taxpayers know where they are day & night.

[MSE Martin]

I must admit I don't agree with the consensus here.

The idea MPs should work for nothing certainly seems a strange one - don't we want conscientious MPs dedicated to their task. If we dont pay them either its the super-rich or those supported by outside interests that would be our parliamentarians.

Personnally I'd like to see a system where being an MP was a prestigious job which talented people fought to get, and were rewarded for. Once elected there should be no outside interests.

Each MP should have a consituency officer, one or two researchers and an assistant. These while selected by MPs should be employed by parliament on a structured salary package so the money never passes through the MP. And should be evaluated by the MP AND HR officers to ensure they're doing the job they're paid for (and not a family members doing nowt).

There should also be office equipment and supplies as needed, phone bills paid and a constituency office supported. Plus a parliamentary team to help build websites which can be accessed by all. If we want our MPs to do a good job, then lets ensure they're well equipped.

Then each MP should be given a salary - pegged to something else (a district judge seems about right to me, similar level of high end public sector job - so that's currently £110,000). Those MPs with distant constituencies should be given an additional allowance for living in london and travel (this should be fixed).

After that no more expenses are needed it can be paid out of their pocket.

A nice clean system like that works. My worry is we'll punish future MPs for the conduct of the current ones, and that'll mean worse candidates in future.

(and just to clear up, while once I had political ambition, I ended that years ago and now genuinely couldn't think of anything worse than being an MP - so I won't be joining Esther Rantzen or Lynne Foulds Wood my fellow consumer journalists and standing)

Martin

[Saucepot]

Notwithstanding, this being your gaff and all there is little to commend in that view. The opinion is often heared that you pay peanuts you get monkeys. Well we pay top dollar and still get monkeys. Half of these venal and corrupt MP's are unemployable in the real world, they earned tuppence before they became an MP and are not worth the £65k basic salary. Ought people really consider a career in politics because its well renumerated? What happened to the desire for public service? Poor renumeration is one way to put off the greedy grasping sorts in it for a fast buck.

As for the other wisteria, it will be used for party political aims. State funding of politics by the back door. An attempt to maintain the status quo. Giving them more money or resources does not mean they are less corrupt, it institutionalizes that corruption.

PS. edit : if you did want to stand, you have a highish profile, but to get a higher one why not add "knob shaped vegetables" to your consumer journalist credentials, like Esther? It'll get you off Channel 5 and put you on a channel people watch like BBC1.

[oldagetraveller]

Originally Posted by MSE Martin

I must admit I don't agree with the consensus here.

The idea MPs should work for nothing certainly seems a strange one

So why list "A" then?
If the consensus doesn't suit then remove the offending options accordingly. That's what a politician would do!

[ekilopter]

Lets face it the majority of our current MPs seem to be corrupt when it comes to getting their hands on taxpayers money and the only way to prevent it happening again is to pay them a modest wage ie national average and bare minimum travel and living allowances after all its just a job.

[maggmogg]

Part-time work, good holidays, good pension scheme, no formal qualifications required; the current salary seems fair plus reasonable living expenses (required to carry out the job). It should be done for the love of serving the community not for the money.
Definitely agree with the idea of having a standard accommodation block made available near Westminster. Surely they only need a simple base during the week if their constituency is outside of London?
System certainly needs to be tightened up. Why were some of these ridiculous claims not challenged? And what about the auditors? Isn't this public money MPs are spending?