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?

Those are all the professions that tend to vote Labour. Teachers, Academics, Senior Civil Service, Doctors. They are all public sector intelligent roles that tend to vote Labour.

Who would be representing the retail blue collars workers?

Retail or blue collar workers..

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:

That suggestion is absolutely mad. The electorate can vote for who they want and polictical parties can select who they want. You can not put arbitrary criteria down, so any total racist bastard councillor = fine, lovely nurse with a heart of gold = not fine

Absolutely not, they're the exact people we don't want. People need to be in it for public service, not for the money. It's a pretty decent public sector wage, equivalent to being the head of a large secondary school, or a GP. Those are the people we want to attract, people who want to work for good in their communities.
Remember they can claim significant expenses too.

No I think we need MPs who can live on their salaries of 82000 a year and have some inkling about how their decisions affect people on lower incomes. Earning these vast sums for a few days work means that they have little idea about the impact of the policies they are supporting. It also means that they prioritise the high paying job to the detriment of their main job - representing their constituents. The more I learn about this lot, the more I think that they are corrupt and not fit to do the job.
I am a teacher. I think my employer would take a dim view of me popping off to do a highly paid second job and neglecting my duties.

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow

Those are all the professions that tend to vote Labour. Teachers, Academics, Senior Civil Service, Doctors. They are all public sector intelligent roles that tend to vote Labour.

Who would be representing the retail blue collars workers?

They do not all tend to vote Labour. Although there is emerging evidence that those with more qualifications tend to vote left these days, so I suppose it will become increasingly so for some of that list of occupations.

There’s a proven link between high levels of education and socialist beliefs.

Let me find it.

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow Business owners and managers of global corporations don't tend to vote labour. I should also have added army general in there, I think they probably do lean tory. Farmers usually live rurally, they probably do vote tory too judging from their enthusiastic support of Brexit. Community leader of a racial/religious group- well it would depend on which ethnic minority but clergy are often community leaders and being more conservative usually means you vote tory (though not always).

I also included union leader in my list. Union leaders are supposed to represent workers. Also I included campaigners and grassroots leaders- that would include people like Marcus Rashford who have run national food poverty campaigns. A retail worker could run for Parliament but provided he or she has the leadership ability to spearhead a national campaign to fight for improved worker rights and the panel who chooses who is eligible to be MP can see that. That is someone who is worthy of the office of MP. Just because you work in a store doesn't mean that you are worthy to represent all other retail workers

We should have a broad range of MPs who can represent everyone in this country. That includes the high net worth individuals. We're a democracy which means everyone deserves representation whether they are rich or poor.

But the 2 things are linked. The whole issue with greensill was BECAUSE David Cameron was using his relationships and access to get state money to prop up a Ponzi scheme; Geoffrey Cox is employed BECAUSE he was the AG.

I agree with others saying life experience is more useful for public service than being a millionaire of itself. However I do agree with you that £80k is not enough - I’d see MPs paid more but banned from contemporaneous employment.

CFOs are paid a lot to be ruthless and cutthroat and save money at the expense of welfare and safety

Would love to know what you do for a living that has lead you to this view. CFOs are usually qualified accountants. Accountants by their nature are a conservative, risk averse bunch. I work with a lot of CFOs and I don’t view them in that way. CEOs and COOs more likely.

I know an MP, fairly well. They do not need anymore money, trust me.

I think it’s a shame that MPs tend to be clubbed together as all being the same. I’ve worked with and known several MPs and prospective MPs. They were all in it to serve the public, because they thought they could make things better. I should add that they all were Labour or Lib Dem, although I’m sure there are Tories cut from the same cloth.

@turnthebiglightoff

I know an MP, fairly well. They do not need anymore money, trust me.

Is that based on a sample size of one? And is their only money from their MP salary?

Their earning power doesn't concern me and isn't an indicator of their skills as an MP. My MP is a Sinn Fein representative who doesn't even sit in the House if Commons so their earning power is completely irrelevant.Having an MP who would actually participate and represent their area would be so much more important.

I’d be really interested to how many on their original election to the HoC took a pay rise vs a pay cut from their previous job. I think that would be an interesting stat.

@Sean2001 The wage needs to be less, if anything and people who care about communities etc will be drawn to do the job.

I'm sure that Doris who makes the tea at the church jumble sale really cares about the community but I doubt she'd make a good foreign secretary or chancellor of the exchequer.

We currently pay middle manager wages (or there abouts) so you are going to attract middle managers (approximately).
The visionaries who are prepared to make the hard and often unpopular but necessary decisions and are able to convince others to follow through with them are several pay scales above.

Remember the ones who are capable of earing the big money in industry etc are also the ones who can take that money away to where it suit them best. They are the most financially mobile and don't have to sit here and suffer the inept middle managers running the country or worse should some have their way.

Anyone who thinks £85k is not an adequate salary is too arrogant/out of touch to make a good MP.

Yes, I live in London. Yes, I have a professional salary. I don’t earn as much as an MP, I don’t begrudge them their current salary but honest to god don’t see how it can be argued it’s not a good one other than by someone from an incredibly privileged/blinkered situation.

Enjoyed this Monopoly board of (almost entirely Tory MP) corruption: twitter.com/jdpoc/status/1458128702122962949/photo/1

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow spot on

I’d see MPs paid more but banned from contemporaneous employment.

I’d agree with this. Definitely no other employment, you’re elected to work full time for your constituents.

I worked as an underpaid civil servant for years.

Still managed to keep my sticky fingers to myself, which is apparently unheard of...

How many people realise that the majority of MPs don’t actually have a hand in running the country in a day to day basis. They represent their constituents on a wage 3 times the average salary. Plus get help with expenses on top.

Those MPs which gain more responsibility also get paid additional on top of that. Eg the likes of Priti Patel etc. Or those who sit on committees.

So I’m not sure why people think they’re hard done by. They’re not.

[quote user1471447863]**@Sean2001* The wage needs to be less, if anything and people who care about communities etc will be drawn to do the job.*

I'm sure that Doris who makes the tea at the church jumble sale really cares about the community but I doubt she'd make a good foreign secretary or chancellor of the exchequer.

We currently pay middle manager wages (or there abouts) so you are going to attract middle managers (approximately).
The visionaries who are prepared to make the hard and often unpopular but necessary decisions and are able to convince others to follow through with them are several pay scales above.

Remember the ones who are capable of earing the big money in industry etc are also the ones who can take that money away to where it suit them best. They are the most financially mobile and don't have to sit here and suffer the inept middle managers running the country or worse should some have their way.[/quote]
Bullshit and you would know that if you’d had any dealings with any of those who are senior managers or CEOs 😂

Many of them are narcissistic with an over inflated sense of ego.