'Would you spend an MP's expenses?' poll discussion

Deals_2

and get themselves a different one. i also think the whole sector is over paid. i have a friend who is looking at giong into the whole civil servant sector as he says you get a good pension etc which you have no guarantee of in the private sector. the whole thing is a joke. i have met MPs and from the mailings i get i usually find the info out of touch with the public. when there is an issue within the council they dont know how to deal with it or they dont want to jeopardise losing votes so do nothing about it etc. i think our current local guy is completely out of touch. why not ask the public what they want and listen to them - why because they would have no moeny otherwise to be able to claim expenses etc.

veloo wrote: »

So, are you trying to justify that the MPs are right to overinflate their expenses, because their salaries are "substantially lower than big business bosses"??? It is stupid to compare an MPs salary with the "big business bosses". If MPs wants to make that kind of money, they shouldn't be in public service.

Go become a banker! At least you won't be squirelling off the tax-payers.

PrinceGaz

63,000 quid a year. It's not like any MP is ever going to need more money than that to live on (it can easily cover a second as well as a first home anywhere, so long as they don't expect to live in a palace).

I don't have the public-speaking ability to be an MP, but if I had, regardless of my political-orientation, I'd model myself on Dennis Skinner. He has always claimed minimal expenses for everything be it travel or accomadation, whilst never compromising his views for what the party he is a member of favours. He's a renegade, but he is a true supporter of the people who elected him, unlike far too many of them who have their noses in the trough and taking all they can out of it at our expense.

happyvalley

i would select answer c. do you think the some MPs are acting like the bankers, GREED GREED GREED NO MORAL idiots, surely their wages are good enough to live on, i'm self employed and i'm paying alot of taxes for these idiots!!!!!

Deals_2

have you heard the latest today that there wont be an enquiry till after the elections!!!!!! this is a joke.

happyvalley wrote: »

i would select answer c. do you think the some MPs are acting like the bankers, GREED GREED GREED NO MORAL idiots, surely their wages are good enough to live on, i'm self employed and i'm paying alot of taxes for these idiots!!!!!

No_Future

rickbonar wrote: »

£63,000 a year is too much for what they do.

Similar with Doctors and Lawyers, ... it's no wonder the public are fed up with the greed and the grasping.

Have you worked as a doctor? Do you have any idea of what the job is like and how many years of study and sacrifice go into becoming a doctor? Most doctors are not on 63k anyway. I'd hardly call doctors greedy. If you were truly money hungry, you wouldn't go into medicine! Not exactly the best paid career out there

notanothergreyhair

A.

One can never had enough taffeta or shoes.

Andyb01

I work in the public sector (not civil service) and the culture in my organisation is very much towards (c). I and many colleagues often don't claim for things that we are entitled to. For example: towards the cost of printer inks using our own kit for when we work from home and we happily use our own broadband connectivity (and therefore usage allowance) to do the same without recompense.

What many critics of public sector workers forget is that we are also taxpayers and dislike any abuse of public money as much as they do. I sometimes stay with a relative near the office where I often work (which is a 100+ mile commute) for which I am entitled to claim an allowance of £30. My relative doesn't charge me B&B and I don't claim the allowance either - there has been no expense for me so it's morally wrong. MPs claiming second home allowances to lodge at their parent's place 9 miles up the road is indefensible - however you dress it up - simple ethical tests tell you that. Also how many MPs swan round London in taxis - what about the (far cheaper) overcrowded underground that the rest of have to use!

Those that are out to screw the system (while at the same time screwing genuine public sector workers for ever more efficiencies) are a bunch of parasitic hypocrites who should be kicked out of office and out of public life!

They give the rest of us a bad name.

sxxgal

A
i`m shallow.if the money is there to be spent i would use it.in this day and age any thing that doesn`t go with the grain gets slatted,so one more to add wouldn`t worry me.

BlueAngelCV

I would go with B. But I know my OH would say A!

I agree that the expenses are ridiculous but they need to change the rules rather than demonising people for taking what they were offered.

rickbonar wrote: »

£63,000 a year is too much for what they do.

Similar with Doctors and Lawyers, ... it's no wonder the public are fed up with the greed and the grasping.

Hey! I'm a lawyer and I'm on (quite a bit) less than £20,000.00. I really wouldn't say that I get paid too much for what I do.

Similarly Drs, yes some in private practice get paid a lot but I would say that Drs are one of the professions that should be getting paid a lot. Rather than footballers and the like.

divadee

in singapore the president, prime minister and politicians are paid a hefty whack, i think the president is on S$3.3million the prime minister is on about S$3 million and junior ministers on approx S$1.6 million. (compare that to obama who is on approx $400,000 and brown on approx £180,000)

They claim this is to stop corruption and bribes and to attract the best talent. All there politicians salarys are determined by benchmarking to those of top earners in 6 top professions in the country.

Wouldnt want to see it here. but my dad tells me it works very well out there.