Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Politics

What would you like to see MPs paid, and how reimbursed for their expenses, pension scheme, resettlement expenses?

61 replies

lljkk · 08/12/2013 10:50

Considering their level of expertise, responsibility, accountability and long hours, what would be reasonable: £20k? £30k? as basic with fixed number of aides' salaries covered, and office and travel expenses, maybe?

OP posts:
TheOneWithTheNicestSmile · 08/12/2013 13:02

Mmm, that's approx what he said. He didn't get it either Hmm

To those that hath shall be given...

CogitoErgoSometimes · 08/12/2013 12:45

If two MPs are sharing a two bedroom flat in London, why is that inconsistent with voting for the spare bedroom tax? Are they supposed to share a bed?

TheOneWithTheNicestSmile · 08/12/2013 12:35

My MP claims between £15-20K for his share of the costs of a 2-bed flat in London & presumably the other MP he shares with does the same. My MP voted in favour of the bedroom tax. The hypocrisy is breathtaking.

I would definitely like to see an apartment block, of a basic (not luxury) standard, built to house all MPs who do not own London accommodation. They would not have to pay rent or utility bills, but could not claim for food. This would stop MPs renting their houses in London to each other & both claiming "second home" expenses. (NB I don't know if this still happens!)

MPs with distant (more than say 1 hr away on main line trains) constituencies in which they do not normally live could claim second home expenses for renting there, but these should be capped at the local market rate; if they choose to buy there instead, they should receive no more in expenses than the renting limit.

They would get travel costs for constituency visits, but the Govt should arrange discounted 1st class travel passes (I can see that they could have a torrid time in cattle class with the hoi polloi) but these should only be used for travel to constituencies.

Performance-related pay would be good - some of them seem to be quite keen on that for the rest of us.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 08/12/2013 12:29

Average wage would only attract candidates with either independent means or financial backers. Neither of which would result in MPs like 'normal people'

JazzAnnNonMouse · 08/12/2013 12:11

I think they should be on the average wage.
Halls of residence if they choose not to live in London.
Travel expenses but tube/petrol/bus allowance just like normal people.

Not career politicians.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 08/12/2013 12:06

I'd go for a standard package similar to executives that are expected to work from two or more locations. i.e. Salary on a par with other public sector workers with similar responsibilities, budgeted allowance for a constituency office and staff , and a notional allowance for reasonable (receipted) living & travel expenses if the constituency is more than a particular distance from Westminster. The idea of halls of residence style 'company apartments' is appealing and would keep the costs down. I'd also be looking at the hours worked in Westminster and calling time on some of the all-nighters and other anti-social practices.

tribpot · 08/12/2013 11:55

Yes, I agree. It's not their actual salaries that particularly bother me, although they have a subsidised workplace and what appears to be a fairly substantial alcohol problem. A little austerity living might do them the world of good. The scale of the payrise given the whole "there's no money" attitude to funding cuts recently seems unfortunate, to put it mildly.

I am happy for all reasonable expenses related to being an MP to be met. And until MPs are showing self-awareness about what reasonable expenses look like to the rest of the population, I am happy to consider funding (using the money earmarked for this pay rise) even greater scrutiny of each line item and investigation of every claim.

My MP lives too far from London to commute home every day (Leeds) and I think it's reasonable for him to have somewhere comfortable and convenient to stay whilst he's there, but see no reason why this couldn't be a serviced apartment claimed through expenses. Or a company flat, bought either by his party (the LibDems) or funded through Parliament in some way.

I think my MP works hard (albeit spends too much time on Twitter talking about the problems of local pubs rather than any other type of local business). I think that, done conscientiously, it must be a difficult and often thankless job. But I think overall if Parliament wants to regain trust with the public, MPs should reject any pay rise over 1%.

chocoshopoholic · 08/12/2013 11:45

Something similar to a hall of residence. Some rooms available for mps from further afield to have as their 'own' other rooms available to book for a single night or two to accomodate late meetings. With self catering facilities.

GaryTheTankEngine · 08/12/2013 11:30

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

AngelsWithSilverWings · 08/12/2013 11:23

As much as I feel angry at the 11% increase I don't think £74k is unfair for an MP. Especially if they are not already independently wealthy and have given up their previous job to go into politics. Being an MP shouldn't only be an option for the rich.

What annoys me is the expenses and claiming for second homes. My MP could commute to London ( 30 miles) easily and stay in a hotel if he needed to be in the commons until late in the night. And yet he claims for a second home in London.

Most of his constituents commute to London every day and manage fine without a second home. My DH does and often has to work late into the night - he either gets the last train home or claims for a hotel.

Claiming for second homes should be banned and cheap and basic hostel/hotel accommodation provided instead.

lljkk · 08/12/2013 11:21

.

OP posts: