MP's want 32% pay rise....

CLAPTON

ministers are appointed from the pool of MPs


do we want ministers with successful business experience or indeed people with anything more than politics as a background?

Andy_L

CLAPTON wrote: »

minsters are appointed from the pool of MPs

or from the House of Lords. I think that may be traditional rather than law though -I think the PM can appoint whoever he likes (or at least can get away with politically) to a Ministerial position. Although since he could make them a life peer anyway its something of a moot point

N1AK

grizzly1911 wrote: »

And if they are sensible it can be a spring board to much more lucrative and less onnerous roles.

They may nominally represent 80000 people but I suspect they on actively respond and work with a small fraction of them. The majority will be passive sheep.

As regard to ensuring laws and services are well managed don't they just do as they are told by the whips largely. it would be nice to have real cabinet government let alone a whole chamber.

They still represent those people and should be acting in their best interests regardless of how much individual work they create (obviously most people don't as even 5 mins per constituent would requires 3 years of working 40 hours a week every week).

There are many flaws in how our democracy operates (yet we chose to stand by First Past the Post in the referendum which pretty much forces strong party organisations) but that doesn't mean that MPs don't have a difficult job and I do believe that most of them are very capable individuals doing an incredibly demanding job in a poor system and hamstrung by an ignorant electorate.

N1AK

ILW wrote: »

What does a bank bench MP do that is so difficult?

There's plenty of information on what's involved, explanations by MPs etc out there and easily available online. If you haven't put in the minimal effort required to find out then you really aren't capable of making an informed comment on it.

ILW

N1AK wrote: »

There's plenty of information on what's involved, explanations by MPs etc out there and easily available online. If you haven't put in the minimal effort required to find out then you really aren't capable of making an informed comment on it.

I have checked and most of the work seems virtually voluntary with no control over they do. Much could be done by anyone. I would suggest the clever bit is getting selected to a safe seat, but that has little to do with the majority of conststuents.

kwmlondon

I know that my position won't be popular on this, but if we don't want monkeys, we got to pay more than peanuts. If the choice for someone is either standing as an MP for £60-70k a year or taking on a job managing as financial director for a health trust and get £90k a year then you can't blame people for putting their families first. If you look at what we get for what we pay compared to other countries we have a very cheap system that is amazingly free of corruption. I'm all for keeping it that way and if that means paying a couple of hundred people 25% more then I can live with that.

J_i_m

True... They shouldn't be paid peanuts. However it's all incredibly two faced isn't it?

"We're all in it together". But it seems that statement doesn't extend to them. So obviously they think they're above everyone else.

I'm sorry but if everyone else in society has to accept pay freezes or effective pay cuts then what on earth qualifies an MP to expect a 32% rise? The public sector for example (currently in a pay freeze) would be exceedingly lucky to get just 3% and then that would be spread across 3 years.

And I'm sorry.. But I do not belive that an MP is ten times more valuable than a fire fighter, police officer, teacher, nurse, or any other member of society whether they work privately or publicly.

It's simply greed and frankly it's disgusting.

ruggedtoast

thorsoak wrote: »

wonder what Rugged Toast, PaulF81 and their friends have to comment on this?????

My comment is that you seem to be becoming a bit obsessed with me. Following me around the board, asking for me in threads I haven't posted in.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

ILW wrote: »

What do you mean by competent for an MP.

Someone with the skills, education and real life experience to be successful in the real world.

What are the skills required to make a decent one?

I'd like to see MP's that understand business because they've been successful business people. That understand science or medicine or law because they've been successful in those fields.

And yes, we have a few of those, but most got elected because they were a community councillor and sucked up to the local party apparatus.

I'd like to see us hire the best people in the country to lead it.

Top managers, entrepreneurs, leaders in their field.

And you wont get that for 65K a year.

Dave101t

mp used to be an unpaid position......but now its feeding time at the farm, snouts in the trough, mp's...., a golden trough for you, mr pm.