MP's - you must work harder - but not us.

[superlightr]

24 days off over Christmas, the longest ever. Whats this a bonus for doing a good job, or a suspension on full pay.

What planet do they think they live on. How can they set public holidays and tell us to work harder, tighten our belts and feel whats it like for normal workers when they dont even play in the same ball park as normal workers.

Classic of the troops can fight on even though they are starving as we are being fed like fat pigs on cake and wine & gold pensions. Just how out of touch is the Govenment?

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20081020/tuk-mps-get-bu...

Edited by superlightr on Monday 20th October 11:30

[jesta1865]

'The announcement comes as Business Secretary Lord Mandelson is said to be looking at how we can work harder.

He is said to be rethinking giving us an extra Bank Holiday, longer maternity leave and more flexitime for parents as he helps the UK economy weather the current economic turmoil.'

i would suspect that cutting interest rates and duty on all forms of fuel might help the economy more than not letting us have an extra day off now and again.

to$$er!.

[Monki]

you honestly surprised that that do this?

[gopher]

It's like the smoking ban - doesn't apply in the House of Commons bar. It's us and them and we've let them forget why they are there.

[funk odyssey]

one MP is quoted as saying his job is to hold the government to account and he can't do that if Paliament is in recess.

The other part of his job - supporting his constituents - he can still do, as some MP's do.

[oyster]

Good.

They can do some useful work helping their constituents, which is why they were elected in the first place.
And spend less time on feathering their nests in London.

[Jasandjules]

Where is the shock here?

Self Serving scum are like the posh version of Chavs, using Mps Pay (Benefits) to fund their houses and think the state owes them a favour.

[Skywalker]

It's a shame that the ballot forms won't have "None of the Above" as an option when the election comes...

Edited by Skywalker on Monday 20th October 16:46

[Motorrad]

They work harder than most.

[Skywalker]

If parliament is closed for this month - then surely their pro=rate allowances should be docked too, otherwise they will have fraudulently claimed for a second accomodation for that month when it specifically was not to be used.

Yeah, right!

[scotal]

Skywalker said:

If parliament is closed for this month - then surely their pro=rate allowances should be docked too, otherwise they will have fraudulently claimed for a second accomodation for that month when it specifically was not to be used.

Yeah, right!

Well they would still have to pay rent, or a mortgage, so that doesnt work, but I think I need to be an MP, its all sounds rather cushy to me.....

[J-Skid]

oyster said:

And spend less time on furnishing their nests at the tax payers' expense .

EFA

[Skywalker]

I actually believe that for MP accomodation, the State should buy a couple of blocks of flats, and then each of the 646 could have a flat issued to each of them and no need to pick and choose .

[Simond001]

Skywalker said:

I actually believe that for MP accomodation, the State should buy a couple of blocks of flats, and then each of the 646 could have a flat issued to each of them and no need to pick and choose .

agreed. One of those 60's tower blocks near surrey quays.

In fact, they could be used as aparthotels, and share them as we never see 646 MP's in the house.

Also should only apply to MP's who cannot commute to work within 90 minutes by train. The others can go home like the rest of the population.

[J-Skid]

Simond001 said:

Skywalker said:

I actually believe that for MP accomodation, the State should buy a couple of blocks of flats, and then each of the 646 could have a flat issued to each of them and no need to pick and choose .

agreed. One of those 60's tower blocks near surrey quays.

In fact, they could be used as aparthotels, and share them as we never see 646 MP's in the house.

Also should only apply to MP's who cannot commute to work within 90 minutes by train. The others can go home like the rest of the population.

Wonder why this hasn't been done........

[Skywalker]

J-Skid said:

Simond001 said:

Skywalker said:

I actually believe that for MP accomodation, the State should buy a couple of blocks of flats, and then each of the 646 could have a flat issued to each of them and no need to pick and choose .

agreed. One of those 60's tower blocks near surrey quays.

In fact, they could be used as aparthotels, and share them as we never see 646 MP's in the house.

Also should only apply to MP's who cannot commute to work within 90 minutes by train. The others can go home like the rest of the population.

Wonder why this hasn't been done........

Hear hear. Well said that man. I like the Aparthotel idea. Cheap rooms for a christmas break for us little people.

That would probably encourage some investment back in the rail network

[baptistsan]

They are the worst kind of scum there is. Happily preaching from one song sheet whilst clearly following another. All at our expense.

When are they going to realise that they are there to serve us, we are not here to serve them.

[robwales]

Skywalker said:

I actually believe that for MP accomodation, the State should buy a couple of blocks of flats, and then each of the 646 could have a flat issued to each of them and no need to pick and choose .

It would be a target for terrorist attacks if they were all in one building.
Or just attacks in general from the public.

[anonymous-user]

robwales said:

Skywalker said:

I actually believe that for MP accomodation, the State should buy a couple of blocks of flats, and then each of the 646 could have a flat issued to each of them and no need to pick and choose .

It would be a target for terrorist attacks if they were all in one building.
Or just attacks in general from the public.

It's a good thing that MP's don't congregate together at the same time in any other well known buildings...

[robwales]

Well yes, but housing them all in one building would need high security like at the other known building.
Anyway I don't see them voting that for themselves, why would they?
And the "terrorist target" would be the argument that they would use.