02GF74
|
 posted on 11/7/13 at 11:43 AM |
|
|
Well that's alright innit
Whilst public sector workers get no pay rise and the rest of the country forced to tighten their belts, MPs vote a pay rise for themselves of 10%.
Nice job if you can get it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jul/11/mps-nearly-10000-pay-rise
|
|
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 11/7/13 at 11:51 AM |
|
|
On just £75k a year already, I can see how they struggle...bless them brought tears to my eyes
|
|
|
MakeEverything
|
| posted on 11/7/13 at 11:54 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
On just £75k a year already, I can see how they struggle...bless them brought tears to my eyes
Its not so much the basic salary, its the benefits that hack me off. They can claim for absolutely everything - Even more before the scandal etc.
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
nick205
|
| posted on 11/7/13 at 11:58 AM |
|
|
I'd rather their salary was set slightly higher and their genuine expenses set within very tight limits.
|
|
|
Doctor Derek Doctors
|
| posted on 11/7/13 at 12:06 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by 02GF74
Whilst public sector workers get no pay rise and the rest of the country forced to tighten their belts, MPs vote a pay rise for themselves of 10%.
Nice job if you can get it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jul/11/mps-nearly-10000-pay-rise
I dont want to burst your enraged bubble but MP's dont vote for it anymore since the expenses malarky. An independent body was set-up which
MP's have no decicsion in.
Up until recently I thought they got paid a lot more than that, I'm not surprised they claimed all those expenses now.
I wouldn't do an MP's job for £68k, bugger all job security, the media all over your past and family constantly, people always trying to
bring you down, having to go to London, dealing with plebs in your constituency, long hours. I earn more doing 39 hours a week in a nice office with
colleagues I can have a laugh with while designing stuff.
Designer and Supplier of the T89 Designs - Single Seater Locost. Build you own Single Seater Racecar for ~£5k.
Plans and Drawings available, U2U or e-mail for details.
Available Now: The Sports Racer Add-On pack, Build a full bodied Sports Racer for Trackdays, Sprints and Racing.
www.t89.co.uk
www.racecarwings.co.uk
callan@t89.co.uk
|
NOTE:This user is registered as a LocostBuilders trader and may offer commercial services to other users
|
onenastyviper
|
| posted on 11/7/13 at 12:13 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by nick205
I'd rather their salary was set slightly higher and their genuine expenses set within very tight limits.
I don't understand this argument.
They are public sector workers - why should they be treated any differently.
"Austerity" should apply to them and that means that they should be cutting back as well - or can they not practice what they preach?
Apparently, they can't afford to live on their £xxk/yr salary + expenses in London.
Well, they should do what the others do and live where they can afford and commute.
They get paid to do a job. If they can't then they should find someone who can, just like the rest of us.
Alternatively, what about the equivalent of student digs for politicians at Westminster?
"If I knew what I was doing then it wouldn't be called research would it?...duh!"
|
|
|
RK
|
| posted on 11/7/13 at 12:37 PM |
|
|
The politicians are the same everywhere: "lemme in the trough..."
This is why I always advocate very rich people to stand for office, who will never be tempted by corruption. We cannot pretend that the world is not
set up to favour them anyways. We might as well admit it, and carry on.
|
|
|
whitestu
|
| posted on 11/7/13 at 12:47 PM |
|
|
In my view the pay needs a big increase - 3 or 4 times as much as it is now, whith some very strict rules on expenses and an absolute rule that you
cannot work in any other capacity whilst you are an MP plus a complete ban on working with any organisations afterwards where your poisition /
influence as an MP could in any way benefit their financial interests.
For a resoponsible job £65k is peanuts. There will be primary school heads in London earning more than that, so no wonder they abuse the expense
system.
At a stroke that would get rid of all those in it to line their pockets by using / abusing their position and make it more possibe for ordinary people
to consider standing for election.
Stu
|
|
|
nick205
|
| posted on 11/7/13 at 01:11 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by onenastyviper
quote:
Originally posted by nick205
I'd rather their salary was set slightly higher and their genuine expenses set within very tight limits.
I don't understand this argument.
They are public sector workers - why should they be treated any differently.
"Austerity" should apply to them and that means that they should be cutting back as well - or can they not practice what they preach?
Apparently, they can't afford to live on their £xxk/yr salary + expenses in London.
Well, they should do what the others do and live where they can afford and commute.
They get paid to do a job. If they can't then they should find someone who can, just like the rest of us.
Alternatively, what about the equivalent of student digs for politicians at Westminster?
IMHO they are not paid that much. Granted it's a salary most people would love to have, but most people couldn't or wouldn't do the
job when it came down to it. As above, in relation to other public sector posts, they are not that well paid. Some head teachers are on 6 figures
sums.
If the salary was set at a reasonable level, then the expenses could be sharply curtailed, making the whole thing more transparent to the taxpayer.
I'd also advocate tax payer funded set price London accommodation for MP's who actually need it +50 mile radius perhaps. Again, this
keeps it transparent.
As per Whitestu's comments, there should also be very strict rules on "other" activities, both during MP's time in office.
Once their out of office I don't think you can dictate what they do - it's certainly difficult to do so in the private sector.
|
|
|
jossey
|
| posted on 11/7/13 at 01:42 PM |
|
|
As dr Derek has said they cannot even vote to not get it.
The independent body sets the raise and this is not in control of anyone in the government
Just a quick point the independent body saved 8.5m in the last few years and the 11% will cost us .5 million so not costing us anything if we offset
the savings
I'm not an mp or work in government.
David
Thanks
David Johnson
Building my tiger avon slowly but surely.
|
|
|
jeffw
|
| posted on 11/7/13 at 02:00 PM |
|
|
I was amussed to see two BBC presenters and a journilist talking about this on the Beeb news this morning in mock horrified tones......I would be
stunned if the two Beeb people and the journo where not on way more than that.
I think it is resonable for a backbench MP to get the same as a GP....around £150K and much reduced expenses.
|
|
|
blakep82
|
| posted on 11/7/13 at 04:27 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Doctor Derek Doctors
I wouldn't do an MP's job for £68k
Exactly what I was about to say.after seeing loads of info today on it, they work 60-70 hours a week, can't please everyone all the time, very
stressful job I reckon. I wouldnt fancy it.
As I understand it, the pay rise is to work with a reduced pension and doing away with expenses I understand? So it probably works out about the same
________________________
IVA manual link http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=RESOURCES&itemId=1081997083
don't write OT on a new thread title, you're creating the topic, everything you write is very much ON topic!
|
|
|
jeffw
|
| posted on 11/7/13 at 04:51 PM |
|
|
If you paid them a decent salary (in line with senior BBC managers for instance) you would remove the temptation to do 'cash for
questions' or fiddle expenses and you might attract some better people from industry to help run the country.
|
|
|
swanny
|
| posted on 11/7/13 at 06:45 PM |
|
|
I'm afraid I don't buy the idea that if you pay thm enough money they will behave responsibly.
Paying huge salaries to bankers didn't do that, it doesn't seem to work with footballers either!
Human beings will always be motivated by greed whatever you pay them. If you pay them more salary you'd simply have to bung them larger amounts
of money to act illegally on your behalf.
The price for abusing authority in public office ought to be draconian, as a decent deterrent.
[Edited on 11/7/13 by swanny]
|
|
|
mookaloid
|
| posted on 11/7/13 at 08:28 PM |
|
|
There is certainly a school of thought that for instance you want your surgeon doing an operation on you to be so highly paid that he has has the time
and training to be very very good at what he does and not rush it..
You could also use similar reasoning that MPs should be highly paid so that they can do an excellent job in running the country for us - unfortunately
that's where it all falls down. The real experts who could do a good job of running the country are running large corporations and making their
shareholders happy and they wouldn't thank you for (in their terms) a miserly £60 -£70K a year.
So we have a bunch of MPs who in the vast majority are in it for what they can get, not what they can give. There are of course some idealists who
think they are fighting a fight against the experts who could run the Country well and represent pressure groups like Unions but they don't care
about the Country they only care that the people who finance their campaigns are looked after regardless of how damaging it may be for the country.
They pay lip service to being Patriotic so that they can get elected and re-elected but all they really want is power and their own aims fulfilled. I
think there are very few of them that are MPs because they want the Country to be great.
So because MPs are not motivated to make the country great but are motivated by personal gain, power (which is not wisely used when gained),
recognition and fame, and don't do what we are paying them for, the press are always on their backs looking for the mistakes and transgressions
to bring them down.
So as I am in danger of getting carried away here, I think the system is fatally flawed. If we paid enough to attract really good people to run the
country for us, they still wouldn't do it because the press wouldn't leave them alone, they have too much self respect and don't
need or want the personal gain, fame and carp that comes with the job.
I don't know what the alternative is but I wish someone would think of it soon 
"That thing you're thinking - it wont be that."
|
|
|
onenastyviper
|
| posted on 12/7/13 at 06:13 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mookaloid
There is certainly a school of thought that for instance you want your surgeon doing an operation on you to be so highly paid that he has has the time
and training to be very very good at what he does and not rush it..
You could also use similar reasoning that MPs should be highly paid so that they can do an excellent job in running the country for us - unfortunately
that's where it all falls down. The real experts who could do a good job of running the country are running large corporations and making their
shareholders happy and they wouldn't thank you for (in their terms) a miserly £60 -£70K a year.
So we have a bunch of MPs who in the vast majority are in it for what they can get, not what they can give. There are of course some idealists who
think they are fighting a fight against the experts who could run the Country well and represent pressure groups like Unions but they don't care
about the Country they only care that the people who finance their campaigns are looked after regardless of how damaging it may be for the country.
They pay lip service to being Patriotic so that they can get elected and re-elected but all they really want is power and their own aims fulfilled. I
think there are very few of them that are MPs because they want the Country to be great.
So because MPs are not motivated to make the country great but are motivated by personal gain, power (which is not wisely used when gained),
recognition and fame, and don't do what we are paying them for, the press are always on their backs looking for the mistakes and transgressions
to bring them down.
So as I am in danger of getting carried away here, I think the system is fatally flawed. If we paid enough to attract really good people to run the
country for us, they still wouldn't do it because the press wouldn't leave them alone, they have too much self respect and don't
need or want the personal gain, fame and carp that comes with the job.
I don't know what the alternative is but I wish someone would think of it soon
Love it - sums it up perfectly and not just for Government.
You can apply the same logic to businesses etc. People who are best to do the job are often not doing the job because they will reveal the
incompetence of those above around or above them.
People know what the answer is (you suggested it in your own post) but it is the one thing that we will never truly obtain - transparency.
Through transparency, people can see what is happening, where money is spent, why things happen and most importantly, ask questions.
"If I knew what I was doing then it wouldn't be called research would it?...duh!"
|
|
|
Strontium Dog
|
| posted on 12/7/13 at 08:30 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
On just £75k a year already, I can see how they struggle...bless them brought tears to my eyes
Bloody right! And as to those bleating that the poor lambs don't get enough money, what a crock. If they don't like their (part time for
many) working conditions I hear you can get a job in Poundland for £60 a week, perhaps they'd rather do that or work in a real job for minimum
wage on a six month contract and NO golden handshake to be seen anywhere.................No, I thought not!
http://s187.photobucket.com/albums/x319/zephyr2000/General%20forum%20uploads/?action=view¤t=3DEngine.mp4
|
|
|
