[arista]

http://news.sky.com/story/1520010/mp...-rise-to-74000


MPs basic pay will increase from £67,060 to £74,000





Sign Of The Times.

[rubymoo]

This makes me furious

It's all the parties that do it.......first thing they do is give themselves a pay rise, whilst the rest of us get naff all!

Makes me sick......and they wonder why the voters don't trust them and are disorientated about politics

[arista]

But less money for bills
to pay for that.

[user104658]

An independent commission decides it and apparently the mps can't even refuse. One assumes the members of this independent commission have been huffing a tonne of glue.

I of course expect the MP's who were against the rise will donate the excess to a working poor family. Right?

[arista]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

An independent commission decides it and apparently the mps can't even refuse. One assumes the members of this independent commission have been huffing a tonne of glue.

I of course expect the MP's who were against the rise will donate the excess to a working poor family. Right?

Yes lets have a List of them

[user104658]

Originally Posted by arista

Yes lets have a List of them

They could donate their £7000 a year to TiBB?

[smudgie]

No good blaming the politicians.
Personally I don't think they are overpaid anyway, not forgetting they can get sacked at any election

[Cherie]

I really don't understand this, Cameron tried to block it but the Committee insisted on the grounds that MPs have lost other ways of claiming back cash. Why 10%, why not 1% like the rest of us have to put up with, I thought there was a freeze on public sector pay, absolute farce.

[joeysteele]

Originally Posted by smudgie

No good blaming the politicians.
Personally I don't think they are overpaid anyway, not forgetting they can get sacked at any election

I agree and this rise is linked to a loss of certain expenses and also payments after leaving parliament too.
10% in one go does sound steep but this is independently arrived at and is after several years too.

[the truth]

This is not a big issue....but the overpayment of usless wastefull unaccountable local councillors, chief executives on 3 times the salary of the prime minister , now that is a massive issue........ps would anyone here be an mp for £74k? No chance from me

[MTVN]

It's not even going to cost the taxpayer anything because the money for the rise comes from changes to pensions and expenses.

It's a very sensible decision once all the emotive outrage gets looked past and it's absurd that MPs once again become the targets of public anger for something that an independent body has recommended. If you want to be angry about someone's pay then there are far more appropriate targets than MPs

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by MTVN

It's not even going to cost the taxpayer anything because the money for the rise comes from changes to pensions and expenses.

It's a very sensible decision once all the emotive outrage gets looked past and it's absurd that MPs once again become the targets of public anger for something that an independent body has recommended. If you want to be angry about someone's pay then there are far more appropriate targets than MPs

Problem with this is though, independent body recommendations are ignored so much, but have to be listened to when it comes to MPs wages?!

Anyway I would be all for an even bigger payrise on the condition that 'expense accounts' are completely done away with.

I just really do feel its a bit of a pisstake given the rest of the country is suffering cuts and pay freezes...

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Problem with this is though, independent body recommendations are ignored so much, but have to be listened to when it comes to MPs wages?!

Anyway I would be all for an even bigger payrise on the condition that 'expense accounts' are completely done away with.

I just really do feel its a bit of a pisstake given the rest of the country is suffering cuts and pay freezes...

MPs have literally no control over their salaries I think though. To reject it would probably involve changing the law and while it might be possible people probably wouldn't be too happy about MPs having the power to pay themselves whatever the hell they want either. It's been a while coming this increase though because MPs pay doesn't really make sense in proportion to the work they do and relative to other public figures - a lot of local council bosses earn way more than the Prime Minister does.

[Livia]

It's still not what a middle manager in the City would make. If we don't want rich people who are independently wealthy dominating the House of Commons, we have to pay them a salary commensurate with the responsibility they have to encourage people with good degrees to look on it as a good career choice.

[user104658]

I disagree Livia, it's already a perfectly respectable salary to live on and thus anyone who is genuinely interested in making a difference in politics will not be put off by it even if they could earn more elsewhere. If being in politics is their passion then that's where they will want to be.

There's nothing worse than a career politician half-arsing it for a paycheque.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I disagree Livia, it's already a perfectly respectable salary to live on and thus anyone who is genuinely interested in making a difference in politics will not be put off by it even if they could earn more elsewhere. If being in politics is their passion then that's where they will want to be.

There's nothing worse than a career politician half-arsing it for a paycheque.

Passion doesn't pay the bills. If someone from an ordinary background with a good degree is looking at the options being a politician with all the crap that goes with it isn't going to be a great option when you can much earn more in another job. Or, become a politician and have other irons in the fire so that your constituency doesn't get 100% attention. The MPs I know work long hours and although the Parliamentary recess looks like they get a lot of holidays, a lot of that time is spent working in their constituency.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Livia

Passion doesn't pay the bills. If someone from an ordinary background with a good degree is looking at the options being a politician with all the crap that goes with it isn't going to be a great option when you can much earn more in another job. Or, become a politician and have other irons in the fire so that your constituency doesn't get 100% attention. The MPs I know work long hours and although the Parliamentary recess looks like they get a lot of holidays, a lot of that time is spent working in their constituency.

No, but £67,060 sure as **** pays the bills. Someone with a good degree "looking at the options" should not be choosing politics because it has an attractive pay package. They should be choosing it because it has a pay package that can more than sustain them, and because they actually have ideals and ideas that they can only pursue as a politician.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

No, but £67,060 sure as **** pays the bills. Someone with a good degree "looking at the options" should not be choosing politics because it has an attractive pay package. They should be choosing it because it has a pay package that can more than sustain them, and because they actually have ideals and ideas that they can only pursue as a politician.

So you want them to have ideals and ideas but to accept a reasonably low salary for the responsibility they take. Not sure I agree. No way would I have considered it as a career option, not just because of the salary but because of the disrespect they generally get and the fact that they can be out of their ear every four or five years.

Something else on which we will have to agree to disagree.

[Cherie]

Lol at the its only 74,000, tell that to a care worker in an old folks home or a nurse someone we will all come into contact with at some point in our lives, most people will never meet their MPs

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Livia

So you want them to have ideals and ideas but to accept a reasonably low salary for the responsibility they take. Not sure I agree. No way would I have considered it as a career option, not just because of the salary but because of the disrespect they generally get and the fact that they can be out of their ear every four or five years.

Something else on which we will have to agree to disagree.

The fact that you think it's a "reasonably low" salary says it all Livia; you have a city-centric viewpoint that is completely alien to the vast majority of working people in the UK.

I don't want them taking pay hikes massively above the rate of inflation, whilst also claiming expenses, when so many working people in the country are also disrespected, are also in insecure employment, get paid half of that salary or less, and aren't getting any pay rise at all in real terms. Funnily enough.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

The fact that you think it's a "reasonably low" salary says it all Livia; you have a city-centric viewpoint that is completely alien to the vast majority of working people in the UK.

I don't want them taking pay hikes massively above the rate of inflation, whilst also claiming expenses, when so many working people in the country are also disrespected, are also in insecure employment, get paid half of that salary or less, and aren't getting any pay rise at all in real terms. Funnily enough.

Saying I have a city-centric viewpoint intimates that I am out of touch with the real working world, and I am not, I just see it from a different perspective. I worked hard for my career, gave up things, worked two, sometimes three jobs to get through uni. There's nothing special about me, I went to an inner-city comprehensive, my father was a soldier and then a paramedic. I swapped my social life for study, and if after all that I had settled for something that wasn't what I wanted and didn't give me the lifestyle I worked for then that would have been my own fault. I would never have considered being a politician and I'm sure there are lots of qualified people from working class backgrounds that feel the same.

Anyhoo, I'm sure at some point we will stumble across a topic where we can share some middle ground. This isn't going to be it though.

[user104658]

You said that £67,000 is a reasonably low salary. You are out of touch with the real working world, whether you realise it or not.

[user104658]

Oh and also, the suggestion that people who aren't on higher salaries haven't worked as hard. Meh.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Livia

Saying I have a city-centric viewpoint intimates that I am out of touch with the real working world, and I am not, I just see it from a different perspective. I worked hard for my career, gave up things, worked two, sometimes three jobs to get through uni. There's nothing special about me, I went to an inner-city comprehensive, my father was a soldier and then a paramedic. I swapped my social life for study, and if after all that I had settled for something that wasn't what I wanted and didn't give me the lifestyle I worked for then that would have been my own fault. I would never have considered being a politician and I'm sure there are lots of qualified people from working class backgrounds that feel the same.

Anyhoo, I'm sure at some point we will stumble across a topic where we can share some middle ground. This isn't going to be it though.

A lot of people work hard not everyone is academic thats the difference, just because someone works in a low paid job doesn't mean they don't give it their all, public sector are on a pay freeze why does that not apply to MPs?

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Oh and also, the suggestion that people who aren't on higher salaries haven't worked as hard. Meh.

Just said as much, this idea that if you don't earn 100k you are not working hard ..what on earth