MP’s Pay

There is a lot of speculation and comment being made at the moment about MP’s pay.

My view is clear. Following the expenses scandal in the last Parliament the public and the media demanded that MP’s pay and expenses should be determined by an independent body. That is exactly what Parliament did. The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority was established to set MP’s pay and expenses. It is their job now not the job of MP’s. It is a truly independent body and one only has to consider the level of dissatisfaction in some quarters with the body to accept that it is not the poodle of the House of Commons.

Personally I have never had any problem with IPSA. I do not claim for many of the things I could claim for which makes my claims much simpler. Many of the payments such as rent are made directly by IPSA. Quite rightly all expenses are published and are open to scrutiny. It is a completely open and transparent process.

As for MP’s pay my personal view is that at a time when public sector pay is being restrained the public would regard it as totally wrong for MP’s to be treated differently to the rest of the public sector. As IPSA are independent my view is that MP’s should be bound by what they decide if MP’s try to interfere with IPSA people will say it is not independent and we would be back to square one.

5 thoughts on “MP’s Pay

  1. Its very interesting with politicians, they are happy to abide by these deals when it in their favour. I have worked as a nurse for 36 years and not once did any government agree with our pay review body recommendations! We always got a lot less than was recommended.
    I suppose we wil start to hear all about pay to get the right people? These are the same people that got us into the mess we are in now! Bankers and politicians. Still as Mr Cameron said we are all in this together!

  2. Yes, you go for it my son – get yourself as much as you can while you can. Coz I’ve got a feeling come May 2015 through no particular fault of you making it’ll be back to the day job with a nice pay off and a protected pension that most people in this little island could only dream of. I’d head for the BBC the pay off there is even better. It’s a pity that the ‘independent’ people who judged your pay didn’t see what the rest of us can – that as a body – we have to many politicians.- 650 of you lot, god only knows how many ‘Lords and Ladies all them useless quanqos and then there’s the MEP’s. On the real planet at the moment in order to pay yourself more something else has to go! As commendable as your ethics and principles might be you are politically impotent. On the large issue the civil servants decide where we are going and the posh boys (all parties) agree with them and push it through You can posture but you achieve nothing..On smaller issues I’d defy you to publish half a page in your weekly digest of what you have achieved in that week.

  3. It is undisputable that MP’s pay needed to be set independently but notwithstanding their findings it is truly abhorrent if MP’s take more than 1% in these particular times and economic circumstances. Indeed ,to hide behind IPSA’s ‘independence’ is both self serving and cowardly. It needs to be noted that there is a huge cost to the public purse hidden in the small print using the proposed higher level of pay in the final salary pension calculation before that perk ends. All current MP’s would benefit – for life.
    The MP’s expenses scandal had little to do with pay and much to do with basic dishonesty and self servitude. They stole and cheated the public purse. Common theives in elevated positions. Even the mother who shoplifts to feed hungry children does not get full mitigation of her actions just because her children were hungry. These were reasonably well paid folk who held themselves in such high regard they fostered feelings of self entitlement and acted upon those feelings. Criminal actions no less!
    IPSA was created in panic mode for political expediency. If they are truly free of political interference then the more urgent task would be to fully reform the UK political landscape. We do not need so many MP’s in Westminster. We are overstaffed compared to any democratic country. Imagine, each two neighbouring constituencies in the UK are bolted together. At election time, one candiate plus a running mate. The candidate goes to Westminster on say £85k p.a., the running mate stays local on say £45k p.a. That’s instantly halved the MP’s in Westminster and eliminated associated London costs, and brings democracy closer to home with a direct line into Parliament via the ‘team of two’. Woiuld that happen? – absolutely no way, because the politicians who would now hide behind an independent IPSA to get a huge pay rise would get stuck in because it wouldn’t suit their party political purposes.
    Lifetime Conservative voter – now UKIP.

Comments are closed.