Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

If it would improve policymaking by 1%, we should gladly double MPs’ salaries.

117 replies

GeneralPeter · 24/07/2026 16:15

1% of UK public spending is £14bn p.a.

Doubling MPs’ pay would cost £80m (about a one-hundred-and-seventieth of that).

If it would improve policy by 1% it’s money very well spent indeed.

OP posts:
Tel12 · 24/07/2026 18:20

MayaPyjama · 24/07/2026 18:02

This.

I think I’d make a great MP, and do a better job than a lot of them, but it’s a harder job than mine for way less pay. And it’s got so much less job security than my job, which would normally demand a premium.

Show quote history

Hardly. MPs tend to make their money after leaving office.

FrippEnos · 24/07/2026 18:17

GeneralPeter · 24/07/2026 18:10

Hard to measure. But the lazy, coasting MP is going to feel a lot more pressure at re-selection time if there are ten impressive, varied candidates with successful track records in all sorts of fields, than if there aren’t.

I also don’t think there are that many lazy MPs. Just that we have narrow pipelines of lanyard types on the left and independently wealthy on the right. To take five years out of a successful career to do public service in a stressful and derided job is a huge step. More people would do it if the pay were better for what should be one of the most important roles in the country.

Show quote history

You don't know how many MPs are not lazy, self serving, fuckwits because the system that we have is not transparent enough.

Again how are you going to measure there abilities?

And given the cureent system that we have and that there are so many constituancies that are majority party held, how will you stop them form getting back in?

Original poster
GeneralPeter · 24/07/2026 18:10

FrippEnos · 24/07/2026 18:03

How are you going to measure this?
How will you ensure that the same lazy, self serving, fuckwits don't just stayy in a job that they are just coasting through?

Hard to measure. But the lazy, coasting MP is going to feel a lot more pressure at re-selection time if there are ten impressive, varied candidates with successful track records in all sorts of fields, than if there aren’t.

I also don’t think there are that many lazy MPs. Just that we have narrow pipelines of lanyard types on the left and independently wealthy on the right. To take five years out of a successful career to do public service in a stressful and derided job is a huge step. More people would do it if the pay were better for what should be one of the most important roles in the country.

OP posts:
NorthXNorthWest · 24/07/2026 18:07

curious79 · 24/07/2026 17:09

Here’s the evidence…. Singapore pay their MPs c$1m+ a year so they are above bribery and they attract the brightest and the best instead of losing then to the professions.

By contrast we attract wealthy power hungry nutjobs and people banging the drum of some singular cause or other

More like evidence of comparing apples with pears.

Original poster
GeneralPeter · 24/07/2026 18:05

TheNoonBell · 24/07/2026 17:42

This is a Labour government so they won't be reducing spending.

Maybe a give them that as a bonus if they do manage to save that much but it looks like taxes will be going up again.

I think it has bad effects on both sides. On the left we get a massive overrepresentation of people from the politics, charity and public sectors, and on the right a massive overrepresentation of the independently wealthy.

I want more people in the middle. So that after 15 or 20 years of success in many normal professions like doctor, architect, local business owner, going into politics doesn’t require a massive pay cut. We would get a much healthier mix of candidates and experience I think.

OP posts:
Octavia64 · 24/07/2026 18:05

It won’t

hth

FrippEnos · 24/07/2026 18:03

How are you going to measure this?
How will you ensure that the same lazy, self serving, fuckwits don't just stayy in a job that they are just coasting through?

MayaPyjama · 24/07/2026 18:02

BangBangBangBangBang · 24/07/2026 16:41

Yes they are ridiculously underpaid. Treble the salary and then ban second jobs and personal donations.

This.

I think I’d make a great MP, and do a better job than a lot of them, but it’s a harder job than mine for way less pay. And it’s got so much less job security than my job, which would normally demand a premium.

Original poster
GeneralPeter · 24/07/2026 18:01

Waheymum · 24/07/2026 17:30

I think mps are on a high salary though. Look at teachers and nurses in comparison.

True, MPs earn about what a nursing director or headteacher might.

The difference to me is that if we make a school 1% better or nursing in a hospital 1% better, it’s important but it doesn’t scale very far.

If we make national policy 1% more effective that pays for the MPs’ pay rise hundreds of times over.

OP posts:
TheNoonBell · 24/07/2026 17:42

This is a Labour government so they won't be reducing spending.

Maybe a give them that as a bonus if they do manage to save that much but it looks like taxes will be going up again.

Waheymum · 24/07/2026 17:30

I think mps are on a high salary though. Look at teachers and nurses in comparison.

curious79 · 24/07/2026 17:09

Here’s the evidence…. Singapore pay their MPs c$1m+ a year so they are above bribery and they attract the brightest and the best instead of losing then to the professions.

By contrast we attract wealthy power hungry nutjobs and people banging the drum of some singular cause or other

Original poster
GeneralPeter · 24/07/2026 17:05

BangBangBangBangBang · 24/07/2026 16:41

Yes they are ridiculously underpaid. Treble the salary and then ban second jobs and personal donations.

I wouldn’t ban second jobs (because I think if constituents want to elect someone who will continue to do a few shifts as a doctor or investment banker they should be able to).

But I would ban receiving gifts, and I’m surprised it’s not already banned.

I realise that creates loopholes. Not sure how to manage that. Maybe MPs need to describe in advance who they plan to work for and any variation needs a vote or something. Not very practical I guess.

OP posts:
Original poster
GeneralPeter · 24/07/2026 17:02

Lurkingandlearning · 24/07/2026 16:43

Are you saying that politicians know the best policies but keep quiet about them because they feel they aren't paid enough so come up with policies that they believe are in keeping with their income?

You may well be right but I think it would be very difficult to do the maths on that. You would need a sliding scale of competence against remuneration.

No, but I think we would get a better and more diverse mix of MPs if the job paid better, leading to better lawmaking and a stronger bench to choose ministers from.

OP posts:
Lurkingandlearning · 24/07/2026 16:43

Are you saying that politicians know the best policies but keep quiet about them because they feel they aren't paid enough so come up with policies that they believe are in keeping with their income?

You may well be right but I think it would be very difficult to do the maths on that. You would need a sliding scale of competence against remuneration.

BangBangBangBangBang · 24/07/2026 16:41

Yes they are ridiculously underpaid. Treble the salary and then ban second jobs and personal donations.

Summerhillsquare · 24/07/2026 16:28

Fine, in principle, but I doubt there's any evidence of causation there in other countries, and in the UK we'd be speculating.