Sabotage Times, We can't Concentrate so Why Should You?Sabotage Times, We can't Concentrate so Why Should You?

MPs To Get 11% Rise: When Will People Realise We Pay Monkeys & Get Peanuts

by Amy Dron
9 December 2013 18 Comments

The core motivations of our MPs should be broader than lobbying, getting paid or their nest eggs, things which seem to be growing priorities to a lot of MPs judging by further pay revelations...

266-Houses-of-Parliament

What is the purpose of a Member of Parliament? The website parliament.co.uk states that MPs are elected by the UK public to represent their interests and concerns in the House of Commons, consider new laws and ask questions of government ministers about current issues and public policy. In a nutshell, MPs are public servants.

The role of the MP is singular. It differs at its core from jobs within the private sector and therefore demands fundamentally different motivations from holders of the position. There can be similarities and skill set overlaps with private sector jobs, but MPs are not elected to chase profits for a company or climb the greasy pole for personal enrichment. Not that employees can’t be dedicated or self-sacrificing or to disparage the important roles that businesses play in society, but MPs and private sector workers have distinct functions that should not be held up against each other when considering salaries; even more so as the benefits and privileges that sitting in Parliament grant the individual also distinguish the post from other jobs.

There are vital reasons why MPs should not receive a pay rise that takes their salaries further above the national average as the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa) has recommended, even if there is a compromise on their gold-plated pensions. It would insult the public, set a poor example in these austere times, damage the reputations of MPs yet further following the expenses scandal and the current cash-for-questions outrages, but, and most importantly, it would increase the risk of attracting the wrong type of candidate to the post.

When it comes to representing your country as an MP, the old adage ‘if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys’ as one senior MP remarked to justify the current proposed raise, does not apply. Granted, some politicians are independently wealthy but current MP salaries are well above the national average and not low enough to prevent those who wish to work hard for their constituents and improve the country from standing for election.

The crux is, anyone wishing to become an MP should not be in it for the money, although the current salary and perks are not to be sniffed at. In fact, it is precisely that kind of self-serving attitude that should be discouraged from entering politics at all. Attracting the ‘best’ candidates to the role of MP does not necessarily mean attracting the ‘best’ from the private sector or offering the highest salary, but rather, attracting the best attitude.

More…

Turkey: Why The Heroic, Dignified People Deserve Our Solidarity

Russia Today: The TV Channel You Definitely Shouldn’t Trust

Sitting in Parliament is not the same as sitting in a boardroom trying to generate profits and bonuses. Issues of fairness, prudent custodianship, attempting to govern for the greater good and implementing long-term policies that will also benefit future generations and foster sustainability are crucial in government, not just responsible practices in business. That is not to say that all business leaders are avaricious monsters with no moral conscience or that some would not make good MPs or bring valuable skills; it’s just that the core motivations of our MPs should be broader than lobbying, getting paid or their nest eggs, things which seem to be growing priorities to a lot of MPs judging by recent revelations.

It is also essential that MPs set an example and show solidarity with those who have placed them in their positions of power and privilege, not put themselves in situations where they could be seen to have their ‘snouts in the trough’. There are MPs to be praised and admired; there are others who conduct themselves in a more dubious fashion.

Whilst serving the country is reward in itself, it would be naïve and exclusive to suggest that MPs should not be remunerated for the work they do. However, a straight comparison with private sector wages in the name of attracting the ‘best’ candidates is a spurious argument. The benefits of being an MP are unique and wide: the salary for a backbench MP is already over sixty thousand pounds annually, additional incomes are permitted from owning companies, sitting on boards and non-executive salaries whilst serving as an MP and the pension accrued is over-generous and protected (although this may be conceded if this pay rise is implemented).

An MP’s family often benefits from their being in Parliament through jobs or association with them and MPs make valuable connections and can become experts in certain fields whilst serving, leading to highly lucrative consultancy jobs and directorships post-Parliament, and dare I mention expenses. These considerable perks along with the satisfaction of public service should be factored into any comparisons with private sector salaries, if such inappropriate comparisons have to be made at all.

Anyone embarking on a political career for personal gain rather than a desire to improve society and the country, thereby helping their constituents, would not appear to have the motivations most conducive to making a good MP. Although backbenchers get paid less than ministers, most of the rest of the country either manage or struggle by on considerably less than junior parliamentarians receive, and without any of the perks, expenses or networking benefits.

Crucially, and bizarrely, Ipsa has recommended the increase despite admitting there is no evidence that the current level of pay has affected the quality of candidates standing for Parliament. Perversely, increasing MP’s salaries at this point and by such a large amount would not only be unjustifiable and contemptuous of the electorate but could actually lead to a decline in the standards of candidates seeking election.

The arguments presented in this article may not be new, but they seem to be in particular danger of being sidelined at present. There is, however, one comparison that can be made with the private sector. If employees work hard, are honest and are good at their job this is generally recognised and they will be rewarded with a promotion and/or pay rise. If MPs want a pay rise, they should be diligent, offer sensible policies and conduct themselves in an honest and decent fashion, then they might just win an election and keep their job or gain a ministerial position, thus getting a pay rise because they deserve it.

If you like it, Pass it on

image descriptionCOMMENTS

Richard Lock 11:00 am, 28-Jul-2013

Spot on Amy, everyone in this country should read this and seriously consider whether their MP meets those criteria. I have argued - fruitlessly it seems - that MPs treat the public like their employees.

Harry Paterson 3:41 pm, 28-Jul-2013

The socialist position on this is the way to go. All MPs to receive only the average wage of those who they represent. Sounds unrealistic? Former Coventry MP Dave Nellist actually did it. worked out at around £22K at the time. The logic is obvious and inarguable; only those genuinely interested in making a difference will get elected and it keeps your MP tied to reality; sharing the same stresses, strains and concerns of their constituents.

Amy 5:42 pm, 28-Jul-2013

Hi guys, thanks for reading. The British press seem to have the bit between their teeth again and the British public seem to be shaking off some apathy; that, combined with the increasingly arrogant, entitled behaviour of some of our MPs, is hopefully going to bring about some change for the good. Thanks for the Dave Nellist fact, Harry, I wasn't aware of that.

Laura 6:40 pm, 28-Jul-2013

well done mate. Never knew they drew such a huge income and that's even before the much discussed pay rise..will share this to as many as possible. A good read and a lot to ponder on, thank you.

Harry Paterson 7:39 pm, 28-Jul-2013

Amy, not just Dave but Terry Fields did as well. Both expelled for being in Militant. Shame; two very principled men who put their money where their mouths were.

Harry Paterson 7:42 pm, 28-Jul-2013

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-23289962

Amy 8:13 pm, 28-Jul-2013

Harry, thanks for the link.

Brimstone 2:14 pm, 9-Dec-2013

The pay rise doesn't come into effect until after the 2015 election. Those who don't wish to receive the increase have the option of not standing for re-election.

Silvia Dealtry 3:44 pm, 9-Dec-2013

Well done Amy, my thoughts exactly. They are practically all the same, but they won't make monkeys out of the electorate, the next election will be very interest indeed. Where are the leaders, and who do we vote for?

Amy 3:52 pm, 9-Dec-2013

Hi Brimstone, there are many good things MPs could do with the money if the pay rise is implemented by Ipsa; it may even provide an opportunity for those of them who have found themselves under the spotlight for questionable behaviour to repair some of the damage. Or perhaps I am too cynical! Thanks for reading, Amy

Amy 6:09 pm, 9-Dec-2013

HI Silvia, it's a tough one! At least politicians seem to be showing some signs of being sensitive towards the people's views this time. Thanks for reading.

Diana Buckley 11:07 pm, 9-Dec-2013

Good article. At last it is being talked about and again, all for the reason of greed. As they can claim expenses for homes, office etc, they get a salary that is generous enough. Most people work longer hours than they get paid for and have to pay for travel, living etc. If you want politicians who want to help residents not themselves, don't pay them more than everyone else and don't let them have another job. Plus, make them do the shopping for some residents who can't go out, so they know the cost of living.

Andy 3:33 pm, 10-Dec-2013

I don't mind paying a reasonable - yes, i know one person reasonable is another persons excessive - salary. However, what irks me is that whilst earning a decent wage as an MP many of them work outside of Parliament to such a degree I wonder how on earth they can find time to represent the people. Check out Tony Baldry - the man must be Dr fucking Who the amount of jobs he does.

Andy 3:37 pm, 10-Dec-2013

@ Harry. I was only thinking of David Nellist recently, I believe he is still active in local politics - didn't think much of his politics but a man to be much respected, always came across as a top bloke!

Amy 3:42 pm, 10-Dec-2013

Hi Andy, I know exactly what you mean! Plus, the additional incomes earned outside of the MP's salary can amount to considerably more per annum, and for a lifetime afterwards. Saying that, there are still some decent people in the House. I have a lot of time for Lynne Featherstone, she works extremely hard for her constituents. Thanks for reading.

Amy 3:44 pm, 10-Dec-2013

Hi Diana, I'm not a fan of the genre, but I can imagine that making great reality TV! Thanks for reading, Amy.

Simom Ross 6:34 pm, 12-Dec-2013

In truth, I don't think a single MP has ever stood for election simply for the money aspect. Sure, 60k+ is a bloody good salary when compared to the national average, but it's actually pants in comparison to what many MP's could earn in the private sector. Sorry Harry, but linking MP's pay to the average of those they represent is just plain daft, the only thing that would do would be to financially punish the majority of Labour Mp's who represent those poorer areas.

Amy 10:45 pm, 12-Dec-2013

Hi Simom, you are absolutely right that the private sector can yield a lot more, but the I think the perks, kudos, connections made and supplementary earning potential add a great deal to the remuneration package of an MP; holding the post also paves the way for those lucrative, private sector jobs post office - for those who might not have got them otherwise, too. I do not think that every MP is self-serving, but I do feel that there is an increasing amount of self-interest, particularly in the more financially challenging and money-driven society we currently find ourselves in. Thanks for reading, Amy.

Leave a comment

1