AIBU to think we need MPs who can earn £1million a year

[Lovelyricepudding]

I don't know what the answer is but AIBU to think we need people who companies think it is worth paying £1million a year as MPs? The quality of most of our MPs is pretty rubbish and £82k a year is not a salary to attract big-hitters of the calibre we need. It sounds like Geoffrey Cox QC may have spent too little time focused on MP work and it is obviously wrong for MPs to benefit from external work gleaned due to their role as an MP. But how do we attract the most capable people into parliament when they can be so successful outside parliament?

-To represent the people of a country you need to understand the people of a country

It seems the electorate disagrees.

olivehater
Is that why you think the current crop are so shit? They're just not greedy enough and the really top notch are still in the city?

The myth that a person like Geoffrey Cox is somehow especially intelligent or worthy rather than just especially lucky seems strong.

He just had a particular set of circumstances, is all.

@Kendodd

olivehater Is that why you think the current crop are so shit? They're just not greedy enough and the really top notch are still in the city?

As someone who earns more than double the PMs salary I can confirm I have zero interest in going into politics.

Depends what they're earning 100k for?

Unfortunately, it often seems that either they are earning big sums for their political connections;
Or they are earning big sums for their "main job" and see being an MP as a side hustle (instead of a privilege and huge responsibility).
Earning silly money for a few hours of work is very suspicious.
But earning lots of money by putting in full time hours at another job indicates that they are slacking at being an MP.

When they are paid large sums by firms, and then award multi-million pound contracts (tax payer money!) to those same firms without following the normal process it is obvious corruption.

I think you have this arse about face. We already have a bunch of MPs and in particular a government, totally out of touch with ordinary working people and people facing lots of disadvantages and problems. We need fewer of these out of touch, can't-relate types and more who actually care about and want a more equal society, not this horrible polarised one that we have now. We need more ordinary, working class people in the parliament.

To represent the people of a country you need to understand the people of a country

It seems the electorate disagrees.

Johnson was elected because (some of) the electorate thought he did understand them. And somehow, many still do.

In Singapore, the MPs don't earn 1 million, far from it but the cabinet ministers do. The Singapore Prime Minister is the highest paid in the world. He earns $2.2 million SGD or £1.1 million. Singapore's ministers are the highest paid in the world. The rationale behind this is that as a country of 5 million people (of which only 3 million are actually singapore citizens), they need to offer more money to attract limited talent away from the private sector. I am not super impressed by the calibre of singapore ministers if I am totally honest. But I think the calibre of some of senior civil servants in Singapore is very high and this is due to our scholar programme- in Singapore, the brightest students are offered scholarships to study at the world's best universities- Oxbridge and Ivy League and the London universities and they need to serve a 5 year bond with the government after their studies. This means that as they started their career in the government, they are a lot less likely to be tempted to join the private sector. I had a neighbour's son who went to Wharton Business school (top ivy league business school) on scholarship; he saw all his classmates get investment banking roles paying many times of what his job in a singapore government owned corporation would have paid him, he asked his dad for money to help break his bond. His dad said no freaking way (and his dad was quite wealthy). He is, to my knowledge, still working in the government today. I read law in one of the london universities and the top student in our year who went onto do a masters in columbia law was on a scholarship with singapore police. He said during our first law tutorial that he wanted to be a policeman, all the Brits (and the public law tutor) were quietly bemused, all the Singaporeans smiled knowingly.

I don't think paying more would attract people of a better calibre necessarily but making the barriers of entry higher to be a MP would be beneficial. For example, you can only stand to be an MP (if you are from Conservative or Labour, exemptions for smaller parties until we get proportional representation) if you have fulfiled one of the following criteria:

1. Medical Doctor
2. Solicitor
3. Managerial position in a global company for at least 5 years
4. Farming/Fishing experience
5. Community Leader of a minority religious/racial group
6. Senior Civil servant
7. Professor/Academic/PhD
8. Significant Grassroots experience/Campaigner with many members of the community vouching for your experience/commitment/Councillor/Union Leader
9. Councillor.

10. Business Owner with a minimum turnover of £1 million 11. Anyone with significant achievements.

Boris Johnson (journalist), Michael Gove (journalist), Zac Goldsmith would not qualify.

The filtering method I suggested would mean we do get wide representation of the different groups in british society while still making sure that the vast majority of MPs would be leaders in their field, . Is it democracy? Not totally but in the 21st century, maybe we need a new model.

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow

A lot of them aren't being paid for their brains or special skills

No one in this government has either of these😁

I was so shocked to read Dominic Raab's CV. You really have to dumb yourself down to fit into this cabinet. I honestly thought he was thick as pig shit.

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow

Actually l think we need mp’s who’ve been unemployed, lived on universal credit, fought in Afghanistan, than a load of self important millionaire tosspots. As in the current government.

So it a no from me .

This. Governments are supposed to be there, in a free democratic society, to protect the interests of the public against private money. The only reason an MP, or anyone else, is worth a million pounds to employers is because they will get 10 times that amount back. When you are talking about an MP, the way they will get that back is through what we used to view as corruption: unfairly cutting through competition to get jobs, or getting tax breaks. Which is directly opposed to the interests of the public.

@Lovelyricepudding

I don't know what the answer is but AIBU to think we need people who companies think it is worth paying £1million a year as MPs? The quality of most of our MPs is pretty rubbish and £82k a year is not a salary to attract big-hitters of the calibre we need. It sounds like Geoffrey Cox QC may have spent too little time focused on MP work and it is obviously wrong for MPs to benefit from external work gleaned due to their role as an MP. But how do we attract the most capable people into parliament when they can be so successful outside parliament?

No I completely disagree.

Getting MPs isn’t like a job interview.

And being an MP is not like working in a company.

@CorrBlimeyGG

To represent the people of a country you need to understand the people of a country

It seems the electorate disagrees.

Johnson was elected because (some of) the electorate thought he did understand them. And somehow, many still do.

Yes and no. Johnson got to be the leader of the Tories because his party put him there. Anyone who voted Tory would have no choice but to have him as their prime minister if they voted that way.

@CorrBlimeyGG

To represent the people of a country you need to understand the people of a country

It seems the electorate disagrees.

Johnson was elected because (some of) the electorate thought he did understand them. And somehow, many still do.

He does understand a percentage of them, especially the racist, sexist, lying, cheating and downright nasty ones.

If they’re being paid that much after becoming an MP it’s nothing to do with their abilities. It’s to do with who they can talk to, who they can get to listen to the company’s interests.
Owen Paterson was being paid £500 an hour - they can’t justify that based on his skills and abilities alone. Apart from influence in government, what tangible things can they say he does for that money.

Do you really think the CFO of a FTSE 250 business should be paid more than the chancellor of the exchequer? The Chancellor of the Exchequer isn't in it for the pay he receives while C of E it's for the doors that it opens.

And of course the perks aren't to be sniffed at either.

Same applies to PM.

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow

Actually l think we need mp’s who’ve been unemployed, lived on universal credit, fought in Afghanistan, than a load of self important millionaire tosspots. As in the current government.

So it a no from me .

I could not agree more with this. Rich people aren't (on the whole) rich because they are better than poor people. On the whole, they are generally rich because of the advantages they have enjoyed. Exceptions do of course exist.

Do you really think the CFO of a FTSE 250 business should be paid more than the chancellor of the exchequer? Yes, I do.

Public service is public service. If money is your chief motivation, don't go into public service.

We need to value service, it isn't service if you do it entirely for the money. Private business can pay what they like. Public service should pay appropriately.

People who earn that much are NOT the best people our country has to offer. They are the most privileged but they are not necessarily the most intelligent, or wise, or empathetic.
Truly amazing people come from all backgrounds and sectors of the workforce that do not pay well - teachers, academics, community workers, charity leaders, innovators and small business people… and so many more… who will probably not earn six figures never mind seven!

*For example, you can only stand to be an MP (if you are from Conservative or Labour, exemptions for smaller parties until we get proportional representation) if you have fulfiled one of the following criteria:

1. Medical Doctor
2. Solicitor
3. Managerial position in a global company for at least 5 years
4. Farming/Fishing experience
5. Community Leader of a minority religious/racial group
6. Senior Civil servant
7. Professor/Academic/PhD
8. Significant Grassroots experience/Campaigner with many members of the community vouching for your experience/commitment/Councillor/Union Leader
9. Councillor.

10. Business Owner with a minimum turnover of £1 million 11. Anyone with significant achievements*

This is a description of the current Labour voter. It would push them even further from power if there was no red/blue wall representation.

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow I don't quite understand your point, could you explain please. I was just listing all the professions that ought to be represented in parliament while also considering that there are different groups/special interests i.e. ethnic/religious minority groups, different causes i.e. climate change/food poverty, farming, fishing that also need to be represented.

And forgot one profession from my list- teacher! Definitely need to be represented in parliament.

Do you really think the CFO of a FTSE 250 business should be paid more than the chancellor of the exchequer?

Some terrible musicians are paid more. Awful actors. Dreadful reality TV stars. Worry isn't money. CFOs are paid a lot to be ruthless and cutthroat and save money at the expense of welfare and safety if they can get away with it. Is that what we want in our leaders?

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow and while I would vote labour tactically, i wasn't really thinking about what they need to get into power. They are so far from power anyway. What we really need is proportional representation and a left wing alliance.

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow

Actually l think we need mp’s who’ve been unemployed, lived on universal credit, fought in Afghanistan, than a load of self important millionaire tosspots. As in the current government.

So it a no from me .

I agree.

We need MPs who can appreciate what the impacts govt decisions will have on ordinary people, not those who work for top city law firms defending people on corruption charges.

Mind you, it did make chuckle that he was working on BVI governor's defence in a corruption trial, and it came to light when parliament has been discussing how corruption by MPs should be dealt with.

Do you really think the CFO of a FTSE 250 business should be paid more than the chancellor of the exchequer?

I'll hazard a guess that since the Chancellor of the Exchequer is a Conservative who generally believes in minimising state intervention into private business, the current Chancellor believes that a FTSE 250 business should be allowed to pay whatever salaries it feels appropriate.

The quoted argument implies that the CFO's potential salary would always be capped at 'CoE minus £1', which is a level of state interference in a private business that the current government would surely find unpalatable.