Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

TheBlueCat

What Should Mps Get Paid?

Recommended Posts

When standing for election, all candidates should state how much, in total, including all expenses, they will require to be paid should they be elected, that number being shown on the ballot paper next to their name. The winner can then be paid that amount, fully taxed, and no more, for the the term they serve. Clearly there would also need to be an 'abstain' option to allow an election to be re-run by popular vote should all candidates put in for million pound salaries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When standing for election, all candidates should state how much, in total, including all expenses, they will require to be paid should they be elected, that number being shown on the ballot paper next to their name. The winner can then be paid that amount, fully taxed, and no more, for the the term they serve. Clearly there would also need to be an 'abstain' option to allow an election to be re-run by popular vote should all candidates put in for million pound salaries.

We could manage with a lot less of them for a start. Each constituency should provide awayday accomodation and the second home scam should be scrapped.

Salaries and sundry expenses I can't get too excited about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What should they get paid? A swift kick up the a***e that's what!

I don't want any of them working "for" me. I never asked for any of them. I never asked for a "minister without a portfolio", or a potted plant strategy, or a Sports Minister, or for them to interfere with health care, schooling, transport or anything else they get their grubby thieving hands on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should get all expenses paid living for the first year - ie stuck in a free pad with state run carers to look after them.

Following that it should be by annual voting by their constituents. Once they leave their pensions should be set by constituent vote, reviewed every year for the first 10, then every 5 years for the next 20, then left index linked to the last reviewed pension. This means their policies must stand the test of time.

Everything set by their constituency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When standing for election, all candidates should state how much, in total, including all expenses, they will require to be paid should they be elected, that number being shown on the ballot paper next to their name. The winner can then be paid that amount, fully taxed, and no more, for the the term they serve. Clearly there would also need to be an 'abstain' option to allow an election to be re-run by popular vote should all candidates put in for million pound salaries.

If you follow this logic then when ,for example,BP want a new chairman they should put it out for tender,and presumably take on the old geezer who talks to himself,never shaves and stinks of pee, but offers to do the job for a hundred quid a week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great idea for filling parliament with minor aristocrats and servants of big corporations. :blink:

There is a theoretical chance a normal person could do the job at the moment, but lets go and remove all doubt huh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you follow this logic then when ,for example,BP want a new chairman they should put it out for tender,and presumably take on the old geezer who talks to himself,never shaves and stinks of pee, but offers to do the job for a hundred quid a week.

Hardly, as a shareholder in BP (by random chance) I certainly wouldn't vote for someone who didn't look like they could do the job, neither would I vote for someone that I thought was too expensive vs the experience and ability they bought to the table. It wouldn't work for most companies anyway since the electorate is, effectively, a small number of pension funds and unit trust managers who'd still go for re-electing their overpaid mates everytime in the hope of a few juicy non-exec posts down the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great idea for filling parliament with minor aristocrats and servants of big corporations. :blink:

There is a theoretical chance a normal person could do the job at the moment, but lets go and remove all doubt huh.

I don't see why, I think you're being too cynical here if you assume people would necessarily vote for the cheapest. It's not like people always buy the cheapest car or the cheapest food after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy. A million quid a year - or some similarly astronomical sum. Untaxed and with first class travel and accommodation.

If that were the case then almost every single one of the current lot would be out on their **** at the next general election to be replaced by someone who was actually worth the money.

The reason that a good 95% of them are corrupt, incompetent fools is that no one with the capabilities for the job actually wants to do it for the pittance they would get out of it. Also, the bulk of it should be withheld for 5 years so that any impropriety could come to light. If it did then they would get **** all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't see why, I think you're being too cynical here if you assume people would necessarily vote for the cheapest. It's not like people always buy the cheapest car or the cheapest food after all.

A rich man could ask for little or nothing.

A decent but poor man would have to ask for enough to do the job.

It might not be 60k + unlimited expenses but still.

This gives the rich man an advantage. Unfortunately not being a fecking moron isn't a requirement for the franchise.

A bigger number mightn't affect people's voting behaviour but we don't know that for a fact in every case.

It just isn't good enough.

We've been here before, it didn't work out so well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When standing for election, all candidates should state how much, in total, including all expenses, they will require to be paid should they be elected, that number being shown on the ballot paper next to their name.

+1

when I apply for a job, they get my CV and my salary demand. MPs should be no different.

If someone with a solid CV asked for 500k I'd vote for them. If a bored housewife asked for 60k + 100k expense account I wouldn't.

I'm availing my services for 200k all in, 4 year term ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All civil servants should be paid by a points/scale system. The level for each point should be set by independent review.

All grades would be given points , teacher 30 points, Police officer 35 points, MPs 50 points Etc.

Minimum wage and all benefits could also be added to the scale system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We hear a lot about what they could all earn if they hadnt sacrificed their careers to the public good, so how about what they earnt in their last full-time job?

Come on MPs, I dare you......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ideally, they should be paid in terms of the job they have to give up (and they should have to give it up, but with the right to get it back) when they get elected.

They should also build also them a nice big block of bedsits to live in if they are too far away from London to travel by second class train. (I'm sure Unite or some student accommodation provider could arrange something suitable.)

They should also be provided with a civil servant as their constituency staff, so they didn't have to go to all the nasty trouble of putting their poor wife or child through the misery of getting paid a fortune for doing fack ull.

Of course the scamming barstards would find some way of producing 5 years worth of fake payslips showing they earnt a packed from a company that went down without paying the tax...

(Edit - just seen the post above. I agree!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MP's effectively have no power to represent their electorate. The cabinet decide on policy and the MP's are then told which way to vote. A typical example would be the Iraq war whereby the electorate were wholly against an invasion, their local MP that purports to represent them either was forced to vote in favour, or abstain.

So given that the cabinet make the rules, and MP's are nothing more than puppets of the undemocratic process, I would propose that MP's are paid the average wage as published by the ONS. They should be paid expenses, however there is no reason whatsoever that they should be treated like kings. Their overnight accomadation costs should be in the range that a company would pay for a member of staff to stay in London.

By paying MP's average wage, it would attract those that are there for the right reasons, and that reason is to serve their electorate. In addition it would put a stop to the current situation whereby it has become a career rather than a vocation and a service to the community. MP's would not stay for more than a couple of years as the salary would not be conducive to a long term future.

Being an MP could be looked upon as taking a couple of years out to work on a charity project, would look good on your CV, a bit like being a school prefect, but no more.

I would also like to see our democracy changed in order that the Government of the day cannot cling to power for the sake of it, when they are clearly making a huge mess, and then exacerbating it further by making ill informed decisions that are not based on the good of the people, but rather their own personal economic future come the day they are removed from office.

I have no doubt that as we move towards a general election, many MP's who are leaving office, or in danger of losing their seats are currently oiling the wheels of industry and commerce in deals that are not in the interest of the public, but in their own interest later when we can expect to see many of them sitting on the boards of the companies as token consultants for services rendered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We hear a lot about what they could all earn if they hadnt sacrificed their careers to the public good, so how about what they earnt in their last full-time job?

Come on MPs, I dare you......

Coincidentally I was talking to my MP on this very subject yesterday.He said that if he had been on the same grade as when he was elected in 1997 he would be on £48k.Of course he may well have been promoted since then so probably not much difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don’t know if anyone has read this article but it confirms many of the points first raised on this blog but also comes up with a few other points.

Quote

” Finally, all expenses claims should be suspended with immediate effect until a Certificate of Full Disclosure is submitted to the fees office. That is the simplest way of getting immediate results, and separating the rotten eggs from the rest.

Brian Friedman is a retired senior tax partner with Ernst & Young. He runs the Forum for Expatriate Management (totallyexpat.com).”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics...ore-taxing.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   295 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.