How much should we pay our MPs?

[Asterix]

oyster said:

OP said:

their £64k basic salary.

Asterix said:

I actually have no idea what an MP earns - I could look it but for this exercise I shall stay ignorant.

HTH

Cheers

When I posted that a few days ago from a different thread, as mentioned, I didn't know.

[Stevenj214]

Rofly Lollers said:

Now here's an idea. Build a giant hotel near Westminster for ministers to stay there. It seems crazy to pay for a second home for every single minister. It is highly inefficient. If they all stayed in a purpose-built hotel, then meals could be provided, security for the whole building, bus transport to westminster etc.

On the 2nd housing question - assuming the allowance stays - why not simply create a 100% capital gains tax on MP's 2nd homes?

[Spiritual_Beggar]

ewenm said:

£40-£60k - They shouldn't be doing it for money but because they want to make a difference.

Thats such a niaive way of looking at it!!!

Thats like saying you want a high quality house, but built for the cost of a shed! What sort of effort do you expect them to put in?

This is the problem. MP's get small wage and are allowed a load of expenses, which leaves it open for abuse!

Just give them a higher flat rate! And maybe they'd have a bit more responsibility if they realised they couldnt charge everything as an expense!

If we want to attract clever people to politics instead of the Private sector, then they need to be paid more!

Of course, to get this pay, they need to be worth it. Which is why qualifications should be required to operate at the top, and not just have idiots working their way through the system and getting to a high position without doing a proper days work in their lives! How can we expect these people to understand how small businesses operate if they havent ever worked in one!

Treat the Government as you would a private corporation. Reward sucess, and most importantly, punish failure!

[sleep envy]

Rofly Lollers said:

Build a giant hotel near Westminster

no need to build, there's loads of empty office space in Victoria Street which can easily be converted

[unpc]

I reckon your average MP should get 50K (double the average wage) and all their expenses be audited and set by an external source. Receipts required. Plus they should have served a minimum of 5 years in industry. This way we get rid of the career politicians and there'll be no more of this robbery.

They are after all public servants FFS! They should do this because they want to make a difference.

[EdJ]

As well as scrapping their expenses allowance, I reckon they should reduce the number of MPs - we have something like 650 right now. Surely we do not need more than around 200...

[V6]

EdJ said:

As well as scrapping their expenses allowance, I reckon they should reduce the number of MPs - we have something like 650 right now. Surely we do not need more than around 200...

They represent an area of the country so cutting the numbers down by 2/3rds would mean every MP covering more area than they do already. I think that 650 is a reasonable amount.

[drivin_me_nuts]

£100k would be reasonable. No expenses, no extras.

[Asterix]

V6 said:

EdJ said:

As well as scrapping their expenses allowance, I reckon they should reduce the number of MPs - we have something like 650 right now. Surely we do not need more than around 200...

They represent an area of the country so cutting the numbers down by 2/3rds would mean every MP covering more area than they do already. I think that 650 is a reasonable amount.

Agreed - the population of England is around 51m so that means that, on average, each MP represents approx 78,500 people - that's quite a lot!

Drop it down to 200 and then we have an average of 255k - that is defianately a lot!

[Shelsleyf2]

How about paying them a multiple of the state pension, or a multiple of a basket of European MPs salaries. The expenses thing should be scrapped since the monitoring, publishing and recording is employing an Army of staff and will always have anomolies and or gray areas, just add a good lump to the salary and let them get on with it. All renumeration including pensions should be calculated in this way.

[130R]

unpc said:

I reckon your average MP should get 50K (double the average wage) and all their expenses be audited and set by an external source. Receipts required. Plus they should have served a minimum of 5 years in industry. This way we get rid of the career politicians and there'll be no more of this robbery.

They are after all public servants FFS! They should do this because they want to make a difference.

+1

50K is more than enough since they get to expense almost everything anyway.

[Smiler.]

Pay them £100K but then introduce a 'special variable MP top-up tax rate' as an incentive to get it right 1st fking time

[Ed.]

Didn't they used to get paid less but it was increased because to stop them seeking funding elsewhere compromising impartiality.

[Greg_D]

i put a quarter of a mill.

My logic is at that level we would start getting MP's that actually have a clue. At the moment they have no real experience and are just slimey little twerps.

We need retired captains of industry and entrepreneurs, not spotty little herberts who couldn't find another use for their history degree!

We should also have a stipulation that MP's must be 'time served' in industry/commerce

If we did that, i reckon we would have a house to be proud of.

Small minded comments like 'pay them £20k' will only result in us getting ex burger flippers as MPs (some may say that is what we have already, moot point)

Greg

[oyster]

drivin_me_nuts said:

£100k would be reasonable. No expenses, no extras.

No expenses?

So how do they get to and from their constituencies?

Do you not claim any expenses for your work?

[thinfourth2]

Greg_D said:

Small minded comments like 'pay them £20k' will only result in us getting ex burger flippers as MPs (some may say that is what we have already, moot point)

Greg

I'd rather have an ex-burger flipper then alot of the current lot

[EdJ]

Asterix said:

V6 said:

EdJ said:

As well as scrapping their expenses allowance, I reckon they should reduce the number of MPs - we have something like 650 right now. Surely we do not need more than around 200...

They represent an area of the country so cutting the numbers down by 2/3rds would mean every MP covering more area than they do already. I think that 650 is a reasonable amount.

Agreed - the population of England is around 51m so that means that, on average, each MP represents approx 78,500 people - that's quite a lot!

Drop it down to 200 and then we have an average of 255k - that is defianately a lot!

But what do they actually do in terms of representing their constituents? Most of them follow the party whip when it comes to voting and that's if they can be bothered showing up at all. Whenever I see the Commons on the parliament channel, it's only 20% full. If there is an issue that people feel strongly about, they will probably form a voluntary focus / pressure group rather than going to their MP - think about which is the more effective means of making something happen?

What's more, we have councillors, Scottish MPs, Welsh Assembly members, members of the London assembly (or whatever it's called) and the list goes on. All of these people are handsomely paid for by us the taxpayers.

[EdJ]

Asterix said:

V6 said:

EdJ said:

As well as scrapping their expenses allowance, I reckon they should reduce the number of MPs - we have something like 650 right now. Surely we do not need more than around 200...

They represent an area of the country so cutting the numbers down by 2/3rds would mean every MP covering more area than they do already. I think that 650 is a reasonable amount.

Agreed - the population of England is around 51m so that means that, on average, each MP represents approx 78,500 people - that's quite a lot!

Drop it down to 200 and then we have an average of 255k - that is defianately a lot!

But what do they actually do in terms of representing their constituents? Most of them follow the party whip when it comes to voting and that's if they can be bothered showing up at all. Whenever I see the Commons on the parliament channel, it's only 20% full. If there is an issue that people feel strongly about, they will probably form a voluntary focus / pressure group rather than going to their MP - think about which is the more effective means of making something happen?

What's more, we have councillors, Scottish MPs, Welsh Assembly members, members of the London assembly (or whatever it's called) and the list goes on. All of these people are handsomely paid for by us the taxpayers.

[alfabadass]

No Salary.

Travel expenses only.

[mouk786]

Well if you had no salary then you would only have minted people doing it

I woudl rather peopel who are more intouch with the avg person doing it if possible

40k is reasonable IMO. But they should be allowed the expenses they need.