How much should MPs be paid? 1 July 2013 at 5:33PM in MoneySaving polls 69 replies 6K views

JimmyTheWig

smala01 wrote: »

But maybe thats why they are bus drivers and teachers - as they dont want to stress of a more senior position.

If they are not motivated or do not have the ability to become senior in their own profession then do we really want someone like that running the country? You cannot clock off at 5pm...

Answer A: Then it's not the money that is holding these people back from becoming MPs, so I don't see the problem.

Answer B: Hold on. I'm not sure jobs get much more stressful than teaching. And since when does a teacher clock off at 5pm???

PegasusPJ

I'm of 2 minds about their salary, and it's because not all MPs are the same.

Some work very hard and when compared with the quoted salaries for professions with similar level of responsibilities, are not paid that well. (lets remember they're supposed to represent around 100,000 people, not only to central government but often also to local agencies).

the problem is others do very little, and they are currently paid far too much for it!
ironically, it's the ones in the safest seats that are the most likely to do !!!! all because guaranteed to be re-elected regardless, as any monkey with a blue or red rosette (and only those 2 have truly safe seats) pinned on would.

But talking big increase NOW, when everyone else's wages is being freezed or decreased.. that's a very bad move

PegasusPJ

morg_monster wrote: »

The problem with offering an "average" UK salary and seeing being an MP as a vocation is that the end result will be MPs who can do it for "the love" of it because they have plenty of income from other sources - maybe not another job but inheritances, wealthy relatives, BTL portfolios, vast tracts of land, etc etc.

this is already very much the case because being a candidate is a full time unpaid job for months on end.. plenty would be happy with a £66k salary if elected but can't afford to take the time to get there in the first place.

pennypinchUK wrote: »

The citizens of the United Kingdom are one of the most over-represented peoples in the world, with representatives for the European Parliament, the House of Lords, the Commons, the Scottish, Welsh and NI regional assemblies, usually 2 levels of local government and even parish representatives.

I don't think that's actually the case
Living in London, I only get Council, London assembly/mayor, MP and Europe (House of Lords does not represent anyone in particular).
anywhere in France I would have had representatives at: town Council+maire, Department (County/Borough?), Region, MP, Senate (though indirectly elected they represent at the County level) and Europe.
oh and MPs (let alone Senators who get the same, unlike Lords) not only get paid more in France (£72k salary + a fixed, tax-free, no questions asked, 65k in personal expenses + £95k for their employees, telephone, etc, part of which they can keep if unspent), they can and very often do cumulate posts, ie an MP is always Maire somewhere as well...

smala01

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

Answer A: Then it's not the money that is holding these people back from becoming MPs, so I don't see the problem.

Answer B: Hold on. I'm not sure jobs get much more stressful than teaching. And since when does a teacher clock off at 5pm???

What i'm suggesting is that we need high achievers from any sector - people that are able to overcome problems and obstacles and make things happen for themselves. I'm suggesting that the person driving the bus is not likely to be equipped with managing the national debt, someone who has worked their way up from bus driver to senior manager/union is much more likely to be able to apply himself to the demand of an MP. These people ARE concerned with the money.

Good teachers are not stressed. Poor/average teachers feel stress because they are not equipped for the demands of job. This gets us onto a whole different discussion around performance management in the public sector - but I digress from this thread topic.

stevemcol

Smala01, without picking out individual sentences, the overtone of your last two posts is that being a high earner somehow makes you a better person. I just don't agree. I know people who have talked the talk, walked the walk, worn the sharp suits and worked on hiding their regional accents who now earn a fortune and are useless. I know a few individuals who have no ambition at work other than to earn a fair wage, whose first stop after work is a charity for the homeless, where they work for free until late in the evening. Extremes of character I know but I'm certain which type of person I 'd rather be represented by.
Many of the individuals who demand and achieve the high salaries are not the best people, they are the best at self promotion and opportunism.

edited to correct shocking grammar and spelling.

VoucherMan

£4,250,000/yr – FTSE 100 chief executive - 208 votes (2 %)

I guess that 208 MPs voted then

Weffy

It takes 4 years of Uni to be a teacher, 5 years to be a doctor, what course do politicians have to complete? They are unskilled workers requiring no formal qualifications - they should be paid accordingly.

osdset

Weffy wrote: »

It takes 4 years of Uni to be a teacher, 5 years to be a doctor, what course do politicians have to complete? They are unskilled workers requiring no formal qualifications - they should be paid accordingly.

Absolutely

Naf

My (semi-serious) idea today was that Lib Dem's & New(/neo)-Labour shouldn't be paid (swineless pseudo-tories); actual labour should be paid minimum wage; and the BNP (& similarly racist scum) should have to pay to have the job.