How much should MPs be paid?

Former_MSE_Debs

Poll started 2 Jul 2013

A £9,000 salary rise for MPs is being discussed by the independent body which decides this.

How much do you think MPs should be paid?
(rough equivalent average salaries for a variety of professions)

Vote in this week's poll

Did you vote? Why did you pick that option? Are you surprised at the results so far? Have your say below clicking reply to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply. If you aren’t sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide .

To see the results from last time, click this.

Gordon_the_Moron

I would substantially increase their basic pay but much of the stuff they claim on expenses they should pay for themselves.

Food
Home Broadband
Travel

To name a few, what's the point of them reclaiming these expenses that are absolutely essential for every MP, just pay them more and let them pay these expenses themselves.

Gordon_the_Moron

Pay them what they earn in a previous job is a ridiculous option. You pay one person £14500 for doing the job and another £4.25m for doing the same job? Ludicrous.

pete_v

Gordon_the_Moron wrote: »

Pay them what they earn in a previous job is a ridiculous option. You pay one person £14500 for doing the job and another £4.25m for doing the same job? Ludicrous.

On the plus side, it might mean we got more MPs who actually have a bit of experience in the real world instead of going straight from school ---> student branch of a political party ---> party "researcher" ---> backbench MP ---> government minister. If their last real job was behind the Students' Union bar, and they'd be paid the same if they became an MP, they might think twice!

(No, I don't think it's really a workable idea.)

Pete

koala2106

I think it should either be a basic pay and they can keep claiming all the outrageous 'expenses' they currently do or pay them a a very good wage (which in my opinion they already get) and remove alot of the 'expenses' they can claim. After all they are supposed to be working for the greater good and for everybody not just to earn crazy amounts of money when the people they represent are all struggling to get by.

In my opinion the proposed increase is simply wrong unless they are stripping away alot of the benifits to a higher value.

MSE_Martin

koala2106 wrote: »

I think it should either be a basic pay and they can keep claiming all the outrageous 'expenses' they currently do or pay them a a very good wage (which in my opinion they already get) and remove alot of the 'expenses' they can claim. After all they are supposed to be working for the greater good and for everybody not just to earn crazy amounts of money when the people they represent are all struggling to get by.

In my opinion the proposed increase is simply wrong unless they are stripping away alot of the benifits to a higher value.

The problem with stripping away expenses is they need office staff and facilities to run a constituency surgery and research for parliament. So you can't.

Plus that way an MP for the Scottish highlands who has to commute to london each week - doesnt' get help compared to an inner london mp.

Naf

They should get the minimum wage, and have to claim benefits. They should have to live just the same as the poor b@stards who they arbitrarily pluck figures out of the air to decide their income.
In addition; no expense claims. They get a travel card if they live further away from London than a JSA claimant is expected to travel for work, which will cover only that route from home to the JSA distance from London - they fund the rest of the difference themselves. No cushty second homes; buildings in London should be re-purposed as basic accommodation; room, shower & either shared kitchen, or basic kitchenettes.

Its_Grim_up_North

75k is OK - as long as they are not earning from another source - if they have another job [or income] then their pay could be made up to 75k - at a max

koala2106

MSE_Martin wrote: »

The problem with stripping away expenses is they need office staff and facilities to run a constituency surgery and research for parliament. So you can't.

Plus that way an MP for the Scottish highlands who has to commute to london each week - doesnt' get help compared to an inner london mp.

Hi Martin, Sorry I meant it had to be relevant to each area as you have quite clearly pointed out they all have different expenses to claim. I was meaning more a cap on food to a sensible meal etc.

I do get annoyed sometimes when people (like myself) jump in and comment on a situation which they dont have all the information on. I dont know all the details on what MP's can claim and until your Poll had no idea how much they earned. I guess we are all entitled to our opinions even if we dont know all the facts (like me)

pete_v

MSE_Martin wrote: »

The problem with stripping away expenses is they need office staff and facilities to run a constituency surgery and research for parliament.

This is true. But they don't inherently need to pay for those things personally, then claim back the money, and pocket any discrepancy between the two. Let the staff be employees of Parliament (where the relevant office can look very carefully at cases of relatives, spouses, etc being put forward for these roles). Have Parliament pay the bills, either directly for regular stuff like office rents and rail season tickets, or via a "corporate" credit card for incidental stuff. Vet what things are being bought a damn sight more closely than they have until now (and cut out a lot of stuff that is currently allowed for no good reason) and if inadmissible things show up then give them a minor bollocking in private (mistakes will be made, so don't blow it out of proportion) and bill them personally. If "mistakes" become persistent, report that individual publicly.

This is no different to (actually rather more generous than) how any business would handle expenses for its employees, so MPs should have nothing to complain about.

Pete

koala2106

pete_v wrote: »

This is true. But they don't inherently need to pay for those things personally, then claim back the money, and pocket any discrepancy between the two. Let the staff be employees of Parliament (where the relevant office can look very carefully at cases of relatives, spouses, etc being put forward for these roles). Have Parliament pay the bills, either directly for regular stuff like office rents and rail season tickets, or via a "corporate" credit card for incidental stuff. Vet what things are being bought a damn sight more closely than they have until now (and cut out a lot of stuff that is currently allowed for no good reason) and if inadmissible things show up then give them a minor bollocking in private (mistakes will be made, so don't blow it out of proportion) and bill them personally. If "mistakes" become persistent, report that individual publicly.

This is no different to (actually rather more generous than) how any business would handle expenses for its employees, so MPs should have nothing to complain about.

Pete

Exactly what I what trying to say but I just couldnt say it right. I completely agree.