Read the forum code of contact
By: - 31st August 2012 at 14:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
No, but who incessantly vote them into office, allow them to pass these self-serving laws, and make not the slightest murmur about being continually ripped-off, in order to pay for them?
By: - 31st August 2012 at 14:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Do you, as an ex Policeman, deserve your pension and any privileges you received whilst in service? If so, why?
I'll tell you the answer, it's because they, you and everyone else wants the best deal for themselves that they can get.
Regards,
kev35
By: - 31st August 2012 at 15:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I believe that politicians should be payed the national average wage.
Surely the fairest motivator of all?
By: - 31st August 2012 at 16:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If you don't pay MPs enough then only those who are already well-off can afford to become MPs. That generally means more Tories. No thanks.
How much should someone get paid who works 50-60 hours a week, possibly hundreds of miles from home and may only have the job for 5 years?
Do you think?????????????? it would be possible to make the thread title more specific?
By: - 31st August 2012 at 17:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Do you, as an ex Policeman, deserve your pension and any privileges you received whilst in service? If so, why?I'll tell you the answer, it's because they, you and everyone else wants the best deal for themselves that they can get.
Regards,
kev35
As an X Policeman, I paid in to Superannuation, 11.5 percent of my monthly wage, so yes, I get what I, paid for, as regards your so called privileges?, What privilages?, or do you mean the privilage of having Rest days, and Holidays cancelled, due to Court appearances, then the scrote turning up and pleading guilty.
CARP.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: - 31st August 2012 at 18:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I do think MPs wages, pensions, benefits and add ons should be sorted by a totally independant body and not the MPs themselves, i don't think they should get a pension until the rest of the population get theirs, that way if they shift the date because the country can't afford it, theirs does to.. I would also make it illegal for them to sit on any boards or as consultants during their tenure to remove the chances of conflict, and then should not be able to do the same for 5 years after they leave, for the same reason.
By: - 31st August 2012 at 19:12 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I believe that politicians should be payed the national average wage.Surely the fairest motivator of all?
I have said that for years, then they would know how the poor off, have to scrimp and save just to get by.
Many are Barristers and Professionals in their own right, so being in a job for just 5 yrs, don't cut the mustard for me.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: - 31st August 2012 at 19:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I do think MPs wages, pensions, benefits and add ons should be sorted by a totally independant body and not the MPs themselves, i don't think they should get a pension until the rest of the population get theirs, that way if they shift the date because the country can't afford it, theirs does to.. I would also make it illegal for them to sit on any boards or as consultants during their tenure to remove the chances of conflict, and then should not be able to do the same for 5 years after they leave, for the same reason.
Tony, I couldn't put it better myself;)
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: - 31st August 2012 at 19:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
We complain about the standard of our public representatives and now you want to pay them next to nothing in return for giving up their careers, sometimes well paid careers in order to serve the public. How is that going to work?
Like all walks of life if you want better people, you have to pay more.
By: - 31st August 2012 at 21:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You mean like the world leaders in the banking world? :rolleyes:
Far to many MPs particularly Tory MPs are under the control of their paymasters and don't give a monkeys about public service, serving the country or meeting the needs of the electorate.
Sadly too many believe Tory claims of free choice for everyone, when what Tories really mean is free choice for those who can pay and sod all for those who can't.
Note the current "workfare" type scheme that the scum are trying to sneak through while Parliament is on it's jollies.
Come on, who the hell is going to employ and pay young people if you can get staff drafted in for free.
By: - 31st August 2012 at 22:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Like all walks of life if you want better people, you have to pay more.
But, we don't, do we? There's a body of opinion that, maybe, we should return to the days when M.P.s were unpaid, since we could be sure that they were in the job from a desire to put something in, rather than a desire to get as much as possible out of it.
By: - 31st August 2012 at 22:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Good idea. That way the only people who could afford to become MPs would be the idle rich. A bit like the 18th century then. :rolleyes:
What we should do is pay MPs enough so they could concentrate on being Mps and not have sidelines.
By: - 31st August 2012 at 23:13 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
But, we don't, do we? There's a body of opinion that, maybe, we should return to the days when M.P.s were unpaid, since we could be sure that they were in the job from a desire to put something in, rather than a desire to get as much as possible out of it.
EB.
+1.
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: - 31st August 2012 at 23:15 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Sadly too many believe Tory claims of free choice for everyone, when what Tories really mean is free choice for those who can pay and sod all for those who can't.
Ah, yes! If we could only keep the Tories out of office for, say, thirteen years or so...
...then the electorate would see how good things could be and they’d never vote ‘Tory’ ever again! :rolleyes:
By: - 31st August 2012 at 23:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
We complain about the standard of our public representatives and now you want to pay them next to nothing in return for giving up their careers, sometimes well paid careers in order to serve the public. How is that going to work?
Like all walks of life if you want better people, you have to pay more.
These ARE career MP's these days... Simply nothing to do with giving up careers, if they wish to serve as an MP they should give up their careers.. You will then get people in the Job that are in the Job to do the Job, not just feather their own nests..
How can you have a MP voting on tax issues, employment issues, incentives to industry who have their own companies etc, you are then getting a conflict as they are not serving their constituents, but more their own pockets.. A lot of companies when they retire pick up MP's as consultants / directors etc... This isn't for their skills, but who and what they know.... Another case of lobbying MP's with a possible position when you retire from the house... Again conflict.
Good idea. That way the only people who could afford to become MPs would be the idle rich. A bit like the 18th century then.
Those nominating them to a seat have the say over that.
By: - 31st August 2012 at 23:33 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It is about time we moved on from this obsession with MPs pay and expenses.
MPs can no longer claim for second properties (or any accomodation in London if they are London MPs), cleaning, gardening or furniture. Likewise, MPs like the prime minister who have a grace and favour property can't make any accomodation claims at all.
It is only right that, like any employee, they are able to claim for the expenses that they incur in doing their job. Again, it is right that they can claim for the costs of employing support staff and office accomodation, which all means that they end up claiming for a lot more than many of us who just put in an expenses claim for an ocassional train journey. Speaking of which, they can no longer claim for 1st class train travel.
I'm sorry, but this doesn't seem to me to be particularly unreasonable.
Claims also have to be submitted to an independent body for authorisation and payment - they can't do it themselves anymore.
And if you don't like your MPs outside interests, the answer is simple - don't for them.
If you want good people in Parliament, you are going to have to pay the sort of salary that will attract good people away from other professions, make sure that they are properly rewarded and recompensed. I'm not sure when you look at what a GP can earn, for example, the present system does this.
All this continual talk of paying them average wages or less is doing is providing further disincentive to the good people that we need in Parliament actually pursuing a political career, choosing instead to pursue better money elsewhere.
By: - 31st August 2012 at 23:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Indiaecho is right. How on earth could we encourage anyone to represent the people if we we reward them so little.
Those nominating them to a seat have the say over that.
To be nominated you have to put yourself forward. Why would you do that if you couldn't afford to?
Perhaps the OP would care to answer the point that paying MPs nothing would mean that only the well-off would become MPs. Is that really what you want?
By: - 1st September 2012 at 09:38 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Perhaps the OP would care to answer the point that paying MPs nothing would mean that only the well-off would become MPs. Is that really what you want?
I didn't say pay them nothing, I asked whether they were worth the mega bucks they earn, I had quite a bit in savings, until this lot got in, and I like many other retired folks, who have worked every day since they left school, never been out of work, saved, incidently as this Government and others said we should, have been erroding away,
I suggest you read what the O.P. stated, in the first place.What I should have put, was "What they don't earn".
Jim.
Lincoln .7
By: - 1st September 2012 at 10:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Megabucks Jim?
It's a tidy sum, but I am not sure I count £65,738 pa as exactly in the pop-star / chavballer bracket.
Moggy
By: - 1st September 2012 at 20:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Megabucks Jim?It's a tidy sum, but I am not sure I count £65,738 pa as exactly in the pop-star / chavballer bracket.
Moggy
Possibly higher pay, but complete ban on extra-curricilar activities, or how about part of salary be payment by results?.
Even better how about looking after the interests of the country and it's people first, rather than following their own undeclared agenda.
Posts: 8,306
By: Lincoln 7 - 31st August 2012 at 14:19
Do you think that The Prime Minister, and all the M.Ps. deserve the mega bucks, and second properties, and all the other perks they get?.If so, why?.
Jim.
Lincoln .7