How much should we pay our MPs?

[Kermit power]

Yet again, the tabloids today are covered with stories of MPs' salaries and expenses. The Daily Wail seems to be leading this assault with the following absurd quote:

Daily Wail said:

Members are effectively trebling their pay by pocketing on average £144,176 on top of their back-bench salaries.

Now, this quote is absurd, because MPs' expenses include things like wage costs for staff and legitimate travel expenses as well as anything which may or may not be legitimate. I frequently claim £3-5k per month in expenses travelling around Europe, but nobody has ever tried to suggest that should be considered part of my salary. What these expenses do highlight, however, is that there is a complete lack of understanding of how MPs are actually paid.

Now, assume that you were to take over the committee which sets MPs salaries. You can rework the expenses so that everything is completely, 100% transparently demonstrated as legitimate work expenses from which no MP profits or loses to any degree. Once you've done that, you need to set a salary which you think is reasonable for an MP.

How much would you pay them?

Set aside any personalities in doing this. Don't think of Winky and his vile minions, but think of the sort of fine, stand up person of integrity that you'd like to represent you. How much would they be worth to you?

Again, many of the papers are suggesting that MPs are already overpaid on their £64k basic salary. It might be easy to think this if you're struggling to make ends meet on £15k a year, but you don't need to rise all that far up the sales or managerial ladder in a lot of sectors of our economy before you'd be taking home comfortably in excess of £64k.

As a few examples, Surrey County Council are currently recruiting for a Parking Strategy & Implementation Group Manager for up to £75k, decent software sales people may be taking home anything from £80k to £200k or more, and a Police superintendant can earn £68k or more.

So where would you set the balance? On the one hand, nobody wants to spend more than we have to on something like this, but on the other hand, these are the people we're trusting to run the country on our behalf, so you have to consider, if you want really competent people running the country, how much those people might be earning in other industries.

I reckon it will be interesting to see the results! Just remember, you're choosing how much you'd want to pay the MP you would want to represent you, not necessarily any existing MP.

[ewenm]

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

[Simpo Two]

In the same way that some salesmen are 'commission-only', perhaps our dear MPs should be 'expenses-only'. That should still come to more than the average wage...

[Jamm]

£20k-£40k p/a

Don't deserve anymore than that I'm afraid.

[Sheets Tabuer]

They should do it because they have a vision or because they genuinely want to make life better.

When a government starts to make pointless laws they have come to the end of their useful time in power.

[theaxe]

Jamm said:

£20k-£40k p/a

Don't deserve anymore than that I'm afraid.

What competent professional person would do the job for that? They should be paid £100k+ to encourage successful people to apply.

All expenses should be wholly and necessarily incurred, just like everyone else.

Edited by theaxe on Tuesday 31st March 14:48

[sleep envy]

they should be performance related - make a positive difference to the constituency and you get paid, make a big positive difference and you get more cash

[Plotloss]

Minimum wage.

Being a politician should not be a career choice.

[Kermit power]

Plotloss said:

Minimum wage.

Being a politician should not be a career choice.

Would you really want your country to be run by people willing to take a minimum wage job?

Remember, I'm not asking what people think the current bunch are worth, because in many cases the answer would probably be "they should be paying us for all the mess they've made", but how much we should be paying the people we actually want running the country.

[Odie]

They shouldnt get paid, they should treble the number of MP's and get the working man off the street who really wants to improve the country doing it along side his Full time job, (similar to how the TA is managed etc)

All his/her expenses should be covered though (upon production of receipts obviously) and if he requires a secretery or researcher then he can "employ" one from a pool of staff at a central location, these "staff" can then be properly managed an interviewed to make sure they are upto the job by the managers of the MP's pool.

Just my humble ideas on a more democratic system.

[oyster]

theaxe said:

Jamm said:

£20k-£40k p/a

Don't deserve anymore than that I'm afraid.

What competent professional person would do the job for that? They should be paid £100k+ to encourage successful people to apply.

All expenses should be wholly and necessarily incurred, just like everyone else.

Edited by theaxe on Tuesday 31st March 14:48

But why should they be financially successful?

I don't want a Commons full of Apprentice wanabees and City boys. On the other hand I don't want MPs to all be career politicians either.

Their current salary is about right. But the expenses need a bit of clarifying - that's all.

[Plotloss]

The only people that would do it are the people that could afford to.

Therefore you'd get a better class of politician. Hopefully.

Mind you, in reality we'd probably get run by a bunch of cash men.

So actually, not that much different to now.

[Asterix]

Posted this the other day in the JSMith thread.

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

Here's how I would level out their salaries (all in Sterling - don't have a pound sign on my laptop) assuming that GB PLC was a fully functioning quoted company

Bog Standard MP - Middle Management - 70-85k pa
Junior Minister - Snr Management - 85-115k pa
Cabinet Minister - Director level - 120-150k pa
PM & Chancellor - C level - 150-200k pa

If their appointment provides grace and favour accoommodation, so be it - otherwise if they have to spend a night in London - hotel room.

Their only expenses are for direct out of pocket reimbursments only - like everyone else.

Those salaries are fair, I believe, and they come with one condition - they have to spend a minimum of 10yrs in private industry before taking office.

[Stevenj214]

Plotloss said:

Being a politician should not be a career choice.

I agree with this point.

I think more important than the basic salary, where there are many arguments for all ranges, politicians should only be considered if they have experience and a proven track record of success in their field.

[theaxe]

oyster said:

theaxe said:

Jamm said:

£20k-£40k p/a

Don't deserve anymore than that I'm afraid.

What competent professional person would do the job for that? They should be paid £100k+ to encourage successful people to apply.

All expenses should be wholly and necessarily incurred, just like everyone else.

But why should they be financially successful?

To encourage competition. With a greater choice of candidate the public should be able to 'recruit' better MPs.

[angryS3owner]

As the others have said, it should be clear cut that they are well paid (around 50-100k maybe the next bracket up) but there should be VERY clear expenses policies, we need good people to run the country but expenses should be just that same as for any private company.

[V6]

Asterix said:

Bog Standard MP - Middle Management - 70-85k pa
Junior Minister - Snr Management - 85-115k pa
Cabinet Minister - Director level - 120-150k pa
PM & Chancellor - C level - 150-200k pa

I agree with this sort of renumeration. It is naive to expect them to be world leading in terms of competence if we offer them bugger all in comparison. All who say being an MP should be about passion not pay or whatever are living in a dream world. Or possibly a world like 100+ years ago where the only people who can afford to be an MP are upper class idiots with nothing better to do than further their own ends.

[Kermit power]

Stevenj214 said:

Plotloss said:

Being a politician should not be a career choice.

I agree with this point.

I think more important than the basic salary, where there are many arguments for all ranges, politicians should only be considered if they have experience and a proven track record of success in their field.

I pretty much agree with that. Would we accept people who have worked in local government though?

[Rofly Lollers]

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.

Expenses should be something which has been incurred, not payment to a friend or family member, and certainly not profit.

[oyster]

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