Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To wonder why MPs have cheap bars?

157 replies

bigbadshewolf · 06/11/2017 22:54

Been mentioned in media a lot lately re 'drink fuelled' culture and there being several cheap bars in Houses of Parliament. Why are they there? Why are they cheap? Assuming it's public funds subsidising? Anybody know?

OP posts:
custardlover · 07/11/2017 08:53

You are clueless. You think MPs buying their own soup will help the deficit? God help us.

ferrier · 07/11/2017 08:54

Nhs canteens are subsidised. Teachers taking school dinners are subsidised. It's not just the private sector.

ferrier · 07/11/2017 08:55

Big bit of the deficit?! What kind of parallel universe are you in?!

Fluffyears · 07/11/2017 08:57

I think getting them tovoay their own way like the rest of us will certainly help. It won’t solve it but our country has a massive hole in its finances and we have millions out to MP’s who can afford to support themselves.

If they work such long hours surely all they need is a bed so halls are a great plan. I can’t read anymore as this angers me to fuck!

Badbadbunny · 07/11/2017 08:59

It's a typical perk of the public sector elite. Our county council has a heavily subsidised silver service restaurant for the more senior council officers. Funny how it wasn't closed down "due to cuts" in the same way the council were quick to close libraries isn't it?

PoppyPopcorn · 07/11/2017 09:01

DH's work has a subsidised restaurant. Truly subsidised, not "not for profit" - think lots of posters are failing to see the difference. They have it because his place of work is 24 hours a day, 365 days a year and is in a location where staff can't just pop out somewhere else to get a snack. (Even if they could find somewhere open at 3am). So they have catering on site, and subsidise it as having a restaurant open round hte clock is expensive. Their thinking is they can't expect the day staff to pay extra in order to provide the night staff with their bacon rolls and pizza at 3am, so the company does it instead. No alcohol is sold though - would be a total no no in that sort of operation.

thenorthernluce · 07/11/2017 09:02

I worked at the Palace of Westminster a few years ago. The bars are not open during the day and the drink is not subsidised. It cost less to drink there than in the surrounding pubs because they did not make a profit above running costs (equipment, staff etc.). Additionally, the canteens were not subsidised either. In fact, they were on the costly side! Expensive sandwiches, cans of Coke more than my local corner shop, for example.

The drink culture there is alive and well, yes, but IMO/IME spurred by the privacy of the bars rather than cheap booze.

Badbadbunny · 07/11/2017 09:03

Are you really suggesting that we in "the regions" have to vote for someone in London, or who will move to London immediately on election never to be seen again??

That's exactly what happens in a lot of constituencies where Lab or Tory central office "parachute" in their preferred candidate, many of whom will have never heard of, let alone lived in the constituency. They buy a small house in their constituency and stay there occasionally when they have to, but predominantly they live and work elsewhere. We barely ever see our MP - he "lives" a hundred miles away. Do you really think Tony Blair spent much time in his North East constituency - he had no links nor affiliation to it - he was parachuted in because it was a safe labour seat.

Pengggwn · 07/11/2017 09:05

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

PoppyPopcorn · 07/11/2017 09:06

More fool the electorate for voting in the parachuted candidate then. Our local MP makes a great deal of the fact she grew up in the area in her election material and it definitely gives her an advantage as she knows the area and understands the issues. From her Twitter feed, she's here as much as she's in London.

Pengggwn · 07/11/2017 09:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SneakAttackDamage · 07/11/2017 09:07

If it's like the places my brother work has worked in the past, it's because they don't have a licence to make money selling alcohol.

Things are cheap because they are sold at cost.

For example, a £20 bottle of whiskey, containing 20 measures, would be sold for £1 per measure, rather than the £4 - £5 it would be sold for in a pub or bar.

Allthebestnamesareused · 07/11/2017 09:08

At my husband's work they have a beer fridge!

liveAtTheMopollo · 07/11/2017 09:11

My school has a subsidised bar. Well free alcohol in the staffroom on the last day of term or half term.

brasty · 07/11/2017 09:14

In terms of quality of MPs,there are lots of high quality candidates that never make it through the cronyism to become MPs. Becoming an MP is not about merit and ability, and anyone who thinks it is, has had little to do with MPs.

PoppyPopcorn · 07/11/2017 09:14

Although wrong, Fluffyears reflects what a lot of people think about politicians - that they're all claiming extortionate expenses and that they should be living in hostel accommodation, funding their own meals or only being allowed to claim back the cost of a smartprice ready meal.

What that fails to take into account is that most of our MPs are capable, clever people who could easily command huge salaries in the private sector. Make being an MP very unattractive and you'll be left with either people who couldn't get any other job and are prepred to "slum it" in a youth hostel, or the independently wealthy who can afford to fund it themselves.

I don't think that's a situation any of us want.

Hotheadwheresthecoldbath · 07/11/2017 09:14

Nhs canteens no longer subsidised and most shared with members of the public.Not many clinical staff use ours,we do not get the time anymore to leave the wards.

brasty · 07/11/2017 09:16

Bullshit, some MPs are virtually unemployable

Ifailed · 07/11/2017 09:27

It's the same old arguement trotted out, we have to treat MPs like special snowflakes, otherwise we'd just get normal people representing us, and existing MPs would sulk & leave and take up well-paid jobs in the private sector.
For a start, there are plenty of MPs who still work in the private sector, rather spoiling the argument that they work so hard they haven't go the time find something to eat. And if they really do find trying to scape by on a minimum of £75k pa, plus generous expenses so troublesome then they hardly represent the population given they are in the top 5% of income bands.

NotthePrimeMinister · 07/11/2017 09:32

I have worked in Westminster over many years. Yes, the bars are cheap, although not as cheap as they used to be. And the cafes/restaurants can also be cheap. I've always been under the impression that they're run in a similar way to student union bars - at cost, no profit made. MPs are not the biggest group of users of these facilities, it's Commons and Lords staff, and those who work for MPs. And these people are mostly not highly paid. I have used these bars on many occasions, but I wouldn't miss them if they weren't there.

A couple of people mentioned smoking. No, smoking is not allowed anywhere inside. The smoking ban is complied with. Maybe some people sneakily do it in their offices, but officially it is not allowed. There are specific outdoor areas designated for smoking. And no, you can't buy cheap cigarettes, and haven't been able to for as long as I've been there, which is nearly 20 years. It was actually one of the first things I asked colleagues as several friends and family said that was the case.

wasonthelist · 07/11/2017 09:33

MPs have to entertain frequently and 60k doesn’t go very far at London bar prices.

Who the fuck are they “entertaining”

wasonthelist · 07/11/2017 09:36

To all those saying the expenses regime would apply to others - it doesn’t.

If MPs worked anywhere else they’d have to start paying tax on their travel costs at the point it was known that their “assignment” elsewhere was going to last more than 24 months.

If MPs were subject to the same tax rules as the rest of us, it might help to get the ridiculous complexity reduced for one thing.

ArcheryAnnie · 07/11/2017 09:40

I can't believe I am doing this, from my position of low-paid, insecure employment, bugger-all pension, no expenses, etc etc - but I think the food and drink situation in Westminster is perfectly reasonable.

The Westminster catering outlets - the bars, dining rooms, canteens, coffee stands, cafes - don't just cater to MPs and Lords, but to something like 14k+ staff of all levels and all incomes. A huge proportion of these people will be working long and irregular hours.

The catering outlets also cater to visitors, both in the public cafe and in the dining rooms, etc - these are used for private dining, both hosted by MPs and Lords, and as straight commercial hires during weekends and the recesses.

On the "subsidised" thing. I don't know how anyone would calculate this, as if I was opening a pub in central Westminster, my main cost would be the cost of the premises. Westminster is both an historic, Grade 1-listed, national treasure which is crumbling around their ears, AND a working building. The premises of each catering outlet and bar cannot be assessed on a straight commercial level, because they aren't commercial premises. The staff, too, have exciting things like pensions and sick pay, which isn't exactly universal in the catering industry, which pushes the costs up. And if I was operating my own restaurant or bar in Westminster, I'd only keep it open when I knew it would be busy, and if people needed feeding or watering outside those hours, well, tough shit. Parliament can't do that, because it wouldn't be fair on the people who work the weirdest shifts, so the low-traffic times also push the costs up, too.

Just as an aside: MPs do have to pay for all their meals and drinks in Parliament. They can't claim them on expenses. (They used to be able to claim an evening meal on expenses, up to £15, if the House of Commons sat after a certain time into the evening, but they aren't allowed to do that any more.)

The working hours thing: it's changed a lot in recent years, but lots of people, MPs, Lords and staff, do work really odd hours. For MPs, many are also working in the week very far from their family home, and where their social life during the week is other people from work.

Privacy and security. Plenty of MPs travel by tube, can eat and drink where they like without getting hassled by other people. Others are targetted either by unbalanced people or extremists or just because they are high-profile. I don't think it's unreasonable for them to have the option of a meal and a drink somewhere where they can be reasonably sure that someone won't come at them with a knife or a gun.

Do some MPs and Lords abuse this provision? Yes, of course. But I don't think that means it should be removed altogether.

Haint · 07/11/2017 10:19

I was a civil servant until recently. We had to buy our own tea coffee and milk

SukiTheDog · 07/11/2017 10:24

But, aren’t we all “in this together”? Is it just those on low and middle income JAMs who need to tighten their belts/accept zero hours contracts/no lunch break/deal with Universal Credit chaos/attend food banks. But over at Westminster it’s cheap booze and expenses all the way. I’d have more respect for this Govt. if they were seen to be suffering too. They’re not. It’s just “us lot”.