to think MP's second home allowance is too easily forgotten about

[freddy05]

They can claim up to £20000 a year in second home allowance from us taxpayers on top of all their other expenses claims, food entertaining, travel etc, and yet they are cutting people's benefits to the point that they are having to use food banks and cutting housing benefits for people having 'spare' rooms and totally capping benefits at £26000.

I can't quite believe that people who are supposed to be serving our country can get away with having so much money in expenses from the taxpayer and still keep a straight face while they try and pitch us all off against each other.

The nation needs to save money, we all know that, but us voters seem to be missing the real problem and we're turning on each other while those in power are getting richer and richer

It's better than the food I've had in most public sector workplaces!

'Plenty of people do get that kind of recompense when working away from home though, Conference - many professionals I know have flats rented for them by their companies, or are put up in hotels for months on end. '

Sure. They don't have that lodging bought for them to keep and sell on as they please courtesy of the shareholder. They have to use their salaries to buy a home(s). I have no problem with their having rent-free government owned, decent one-bed apartments or corporate housing.

The practice of their renting to each other or from relatives should be banned - you can't claim HB renting from your relatives for the most part.

The practice of employing family members should be banned - plenty of companies disallow this practice.

No more bar.

Canteen - sure, why not, as well as a meal allowance for late nights. IIRC, it's £15. That should be one person a reasonable dinner from a takeaway in London.

I don't think it should be the default assumption that the best people to be MPs are necessarily those with the highest earning potential in the first place, neither that those who value money as the most important motivating factor for them in their job will do the best job of being an MP.

I wonder if a bigger factor in not attracting better people is the fact that getting on the ticket is so closely linked to party membership etc. Mot quite sure how you solve that one.

The people I am thinking of in public sector have often doubled their salary by going private, others been offered same and not gone. So I am talking about the high fliers I guess. But I think that's the right group to compare to here, because people re saying that all MP salaries should be increased to reflect the fact that some could earn more doing other things (ie the best in both cases).

I think the second career thing is tricky. I do agree that career MPs may be problematic due to real world experience etc, but some MPs still spend a good chunk of time on first career, meaning they are less available for serving constituents.

Creature - by and large MPs are educated, intelligent (whatever you might think about their personal political views), ambitious and driven. Which means that they could decide to enter a range of professions/careers instead of politics if they chose to.
I do think that expenses need to be looked at again, but I think the wage should stay where it is or possibly even rise quite significantly but the number and extent of things that can be claimed for be reduced significantly at the same time.

Hotel - yes, she repaid quite a lot - voluntarily, as it was all perfectly within the rules at the time.

Ah..fair one as regards dorms Hotel

would you make MPs children sleep in dorms?

MPs children tend to live in their constituency homes. If they are London MPs they should pay or their first home in same way as other workers do.

who? me?

"Sure. They don't have that lodging bought for them to keep and sell on as they please courtesy of the shareholder."

But that loophole has been closed, albeit clumsily. Those renting from other members have been stopped from doing so and they are no longer able to have a property bought by the taxpayer.

'would you make MPs children sleep in dorms?'

Why would they be sleeping in dorms? Their parent works away during the week, bar 12 weeks a year, and stays in a one-bed flat provided rent-free by his or her employer. In return he/she also gets the £64-£65K, travel allowance, grocery allowance, subsidised meals in the canteen and £15 to buy a meal for late night sittings, a very generous pension.

I know several MPS whose children live and go to school in london and the family return to their constituency at the weekend.

That is their choice, then, to run two homes, Madame, when reasonably they, the employee, can be accommodated him/herself in London paid for by the employer. I know someone whose spouse is a high-ranking military officer. During his/her employment in London, he/she was accommodated in a one-bed MOD flat (in a nice area). Had he/she wanted the whole family to live there, then he/she would have been granted the allowance for that flat and expected to pay the difference out of his/her salary. If that's good enough for an officer making decisions about many lives, then it's good enough for MPs.

I do t think a two-centred life like that should be supported really. In any case, no one is really suggesting dorms, are they? A decent one bed place or hotel room, rather than rent for a big family home seems reasonable I think.

Their expense allowance should be dependant on how much money they have in the bank, just like benefits are. So anything over £6000 is reduced accordingly. All those millionaire MP can afford to fund themselves living near Parliament. And it means that MPs with lower bank balances can be helped out. After all as the big man DC said, "We're all in this together," therefore all the rich ones can start putting their hands in their pockets and keep their fingers out of the taxpayer's pot.

The lack of security is already counterbalanced with the opportunities that they have for employment on boards and directorships etc imo

Well in my world that's a case of choose your poison MadameD. You choose to take an allocated home via the existing forces system (which you pay for) and return home at the weekends OR your family stays at 'home' and you have an expat flat.

You can't, as the saying goes, have it every which way but loose imho.

A decent 1 bed place that they don't get to own afterwards deadwoman would be fine - so lent to them.

Mps who only occasionally attend parliament should only get put up for the nights they are there - no need to fund their purchase of a london pad.

YADNBU.

I do think we have to be careful that by insisting that MPs stay in London alone during the week rather than being able to have their families with them, that we push women further out of frontline politics.

Seems like wannabe MPs can't get it right- if they're low paid before election then people assume they're in it for the money, if they're highly paid then they apparently have no idea how 'normal' people live.

MPs don't necessarily have to be in London all week. Even Ministers (in theory) return home on Fridays. But I take your point.

Agree with everything Binky says

MPs are there to serve. Give them allowances to make up to the inconvenience where necessary but don't throw money at them just because they could earn more elsewhere - a spurious argument in my mind anyway.

I work in the public sector and earn well below what I could get if I I went to the private sector. The same could be said of many senior civil servants. However the job of an MP is fairly unique and interesting, they get incredible privilege etc so why do they need a huge salary on top of that?

Given that 90% of the working population earns less than MPs, I think the salary is a good one quite frankly.

I don't agree with all the "house them in single dorms" calls. That would make the job totally shit for someone who needs to split their time between two cities.

I do not agree with helping MPs buy second homes in the capital, there is no need for them to benefit from capital rises.

I like the idea of a block of serviced one bed apartments. Probably quite hard to administer tho and manage demand and availability. Not sure it would be particularly cheap either with the cleaning etc required on check out. Or maybe easier, a block of one bed flats available to rent long term would be easier. But who would build and manage the block? What would happen if there aren't any available? Tricky to find an acceptable solution!

Jeepers talk about the politics of envy , some of you would clearly prefer that they turned up in sackcloth and ashes.

Out MPS are some of the worst paid in the western world and frankly we are paying for it in the calibre of people who are standing . Unless you have a private income or are sponsored by a union for most it's just not a viable career choice . By the time you factor in the disruption to family life and the career instability etc only the few will consider it .

'I do think we have to be careful that by insisting that MPs stay in London alone during the week rather than being able to have their families with them, that we push women further out of frontline politics.'

Bollocks. Men can look after children just as well as women.