Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[albitz]

More than half of them are having their energy bills paid by the taxpayer. Cleg and Milliband are both having theirs paid. Which makes Millibands claim that he switched supplier to save money a bit suspect to say the least.
Imo its beyond outrageous that many of us are worried about the amount of money we have to pay for energy,and then we ay a big slice of our income in taxes, so these parasites can have theirs for free. Despite the fact that many of them are seriously wealthy people.
They really don't get it (still) do they ! 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2486858/MPs-including-Ed-Miliband-Nick-Clegg-energy-bills-paid-expenses.html

[Nickbat]

http://order-order.com/2013/11/04/re-renting-davey-claims-expenses-for-libdem-owned-officemoney-paid-to-company-of-which-wife-is-director/

 

[cleggy]

More than half of them are having their energy bills paid by the taxpayer. Cleg and Milliband are both having theirs paid. Which makes Millibands claim that he switched supplier to save money a bit suspect to say the least.
Imo its beyond outrageous that many of us are worried about the amount of money we have to pay for energy,and then we ay a big slice of our income in taxes, so these parasites can have theirs for free. Despite the fact that many of them are seriously wealthy people.
They really don't get it (still) do they ! 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2486858/MPs-including-Ed-Miliband-Nick-Clegg-energy-bills-paid-expenses.html

NO and don't forget the forthcoming pay rise

[Rods2]

"MP's expenses - they are at it again."

Did they ever stop then? 

This is a problem in many ways, some of the bills are £4-5000, do they need to try and save energy like the rest of us - No.

Do they realise the impact rising prices in a flat wholesale market is having on Mr Average - No.

Without experiencing the real problems and difficulties that us plebs are suffering, can they fairly represent us - No.

Politics has always been a rich persons pastime, but at least in the past it was generally successful people who had, had successful careers that became MPs with a spirit of giving something back through public service. Unfortunately, the move from this to career politicians has been very detrimental to the running of the UK. 

If you were recruiting a board of directors to run a £1.7tn a year business, how many of the current MP's would you pick to be voted for by the shareholders, us the voters? For me very few, and would you pick the CEO where his only experience was as a junior marketing spiv, and the financial director where he has entered data on the deceased on an NHS computer and folded towels? 

Normally, pay is increased dramatically when there is a shortage of people to fill positions. Where MP's have to go through a party selection process where there are plenty of people trying to get the jobs, what's the justification for such a big pay rise? Are just remembered an 'independent' pay review body! Well we know that system works very well as executive pay uses the same system and we know there is plenty of restraint with directors pay in public companies. 

[cem_devecioglu]

More than half of them are having their energy bills paid by the taxpayer. Cleg and Milliband are both having theirs paid. Which makes Millibands claim that he switched supplier to save money a bit suspect to say the least.
Imo its beyond outrageous that many of us are worried about the amount of money we have to pay for energy,and then we ay a big slice of our income in taxes, so these parasites can have theirs for free. Despite the fact that many of them are seriously wealthy people.
They really don't get it (still) do they !
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2486858/MPs-including-Ed-Miliband-Nick-Clegg-energy-bills-paid-expenses.html

Albert (seriously) your thoughts today must have echoed in my mind..  nearly the same time ( with local 2 hours difference) I was thinking of electric and gas bills and dont know why  and dont do you question structure also came to my mind which neraly never happened before.. its really weird



ps: I'm not joking..
 

[Lizzie_Zoom]

"MP's expenses - they are at it again."


Politics has always been a rich persons pastime, but at least in the past it was generally successful people who had, had successful careers that became MPs with a spirit of giving something back through public service. Unfortunately, the move from this to career politicians has been very detrimental to the running of the UK. 

If you were recruiting a board of directors to run a £1.7tn a year business, how many of the current MP's would you pick to be voted for by the shareholders, us the voters? For me very few, and would you pick the CEO where his only experience was as a junior marketing spiv, and the financial director where he has entered data on the deceased on an NHS computer and folded towels? 

But Rod2, would you just accept the £66,400 salary that an MP "enjoys" for helping to run a multi-trillion pound business?  Do you think a director who works all kind of hours, and takes on often high levels of responsibility, in such a business, who's contract could be terminated after just 5 years, is only worth that £66,400 per year?  In addition these energy bills are being paid for their second homes that in many cases they need to do their job to the full. But do you think these costs should come out of their basic salary?

If you think "yes" to these questions, do you think we are attracting the right people who would accept such terribly low pay for their job?  Could this be the reason why we do not attract the top business people into politics who can earn many times over and above £66k per year?

I wouldn't have left my senior managerial post for such terms & conditions that's for sure!  I wanted, and achieved, a highly paid career in the long term.

I really think the British public should get real about this and pay their political representatives a decent salary to reflect the responsibility they take on that most of Joe Public would never take on themselves. Then we could demand higher standards

[albitz]

That would be a reasonable point of view if -
They didn't get a very nice pension for life if they lose their seat after 5 years.
They didn't (in many cases) receive expenses & perks which come to much more than their basic salary
They didn't have twice as much holiday as a school teacher and have plenty of time to do other lucrative jobs
If they weren't constantly telling everyone (and rightly so) that the country is skint so everyone must tighten their belts regarding any kind of public spending.
If they didn't use their position as MP,s to hire themselves out as "advisers" to anyone who wants to exert pressure and influence in high places.
If they hadn't limited public sector wage increses to 1%, regardless of extenuating circumstances,some sectors feel they have.
They are part of the public sector,and if they had any morals/scruples/principles would limit them selves to the same 1% as everyone else.
Similarily, their pensions are at a ludicrously high level.They are telling us (again,rightly so) that public sector pension liabilities can never be met,and public servants need to realise this and agree to more realistic pension packages. They are supposed to be public servants, so the same must apply to them.

[Nickbat]

"MP's expenses - they are at it again."


Politics has always been a rich persons pastime, but at least in the past it was generally successful people who had, had successful careers that became MPs with a spirit of giving something back through public service. Unfortunately, the move from this to career politicians has been very detrimental to the running of the UK. 

If you were recruiting a board of directors to run a £1.7tn a year business, how many of the current MP's would you pick to be voted for by the shareholders, us the voters? For me very few, and would you pick the CEO where his only experience was as a junior marketing spiv, and the financial director where he has entered data on the deceased on an NHS computer and folded towels? 

But Rod2, would you just accept the £66,400 salary that an MP "enjoys" for helping to run a multi-trillion pound business?  Do you think a director who works all kind of hours, and takes on often high levels of responsibility, in such a business, who's contract could be terminated after just 5 years, is only worth that £66,400 per year?  In addition these energy bills are being paid for their second homes that in many cases they need to do their job to the full. But do you think these costs should come out of their basic salary?

If you think "yes" to these questions, do you think we are attracting the right people who would accept such terribly low pay for their job?  Could this be the reason why we do not attract the top business people into politics who can earn many times over and above £66k per year?

I wouldn't have left my senior managerial post for such terms & conditions that's for sure!  I wanted, and achieved, a highly paid career in the long term.

I really think the British public should get real about this and pay their political representatives a decent salary to reflect the responsibility they take on that most of Joe Public would never take on themselves. Then we could demand higher standards

The people we want in Westminster are those who want to be there purely out of a sense of duty to their country. If their passion of duty can effectively be bought off for a a few grand more per annum, then they are not wanted. 

The salary should be the last thing on an MP's mind.

[cam2502]

Billy Connelly got it spot on when he said the very fact someone wants to become an MP should automatically ban them from becoming one.
They're all in it for their own gain not ours, noses in every trough going. 

[Kevin Wood]

That would be a reasonable point of view if -
They didn't get a very nice pension for life if they lose their seat after 5 years.
They didn't (in many cases) receive expenses & perks which come to much more than their basic salary
They didn't have twice as much holiday as a school teacher and have plenty of time to do other lucrative jobs
If they weren't constantly telling everyone (and rightly so) that the country is skint so everyone must tighten their belts regarding any kind of public spending.
If they didn't use their position as MP,s to hire themselves out as "advisers" to anyone who wants to exert pressure and influence in high places.
If they hadn't limited public sector wage increses to 1%, regardless of extenuating circumstances,some sectors feel they have.
They are part of the public sector,and if they had any morals/scruples/principles would limit them selves to the same 1% as everyone else.
Similarily, their pensions are at a ludicrously high level.They are telling us (again,rightly so) that public sector pension liabilities can never be met,and public servants need to realise this and agree to more realistic pension packages. They are supposed to be public servants, so the same must apply to them.

You forgot employing their spouses and any offspring 5 figure sums to open the mail in their "constiuency offices" when they are at their second homes - if they don't let them back out and sleep on someone's sofa when the deign to turn up in parliament.

Yes, let's align their salaries with industry. With the amount of management experience the average career politician has it shouldn't be too expensive, but let's also align their pensions and expenses with industrial norms too. I.E. claim in accordance with what the law and company policy allows and hand in receipts!

[Rods2]

"MP's expenses - they are at it again."


Politics has always been a rich persons pastime, but at least in the past it was generally successful people who had, had successful careers that became MPs with a spirit of giving something back through public service. Unfortunately, the move from this to career politicians has been very detrimental to the running of the UK. 

If you were recruiting a board of directors to run a £1.7tn a year business, how many of the current MP's would you pick to be voted for by the shareholders, us the voters? For me very few, and would you pick the CEO where his only experience was as a junior marketing spiv, and the financial director where he has entered data on the deceased on an NHS computer and folded towels? 

But Rod2, would you just accept the £66,400 salary that an MP "enjoys" for helping to run a multi-trillion pound business?  Do you think a director who works all kind of hours, and takes on often high levels of responsibility, in such a business, who's contract could be terminated after just 5 years, is only worth that £66,400 per year?  In addition these energy bills are being paid for their second homes that in many cases they need to do their job to the full. But do you think these costs should come out of their basic salary?

If you think "yes" to these questions, do you think we are attracting the right people who would accept such terribly low pay for their job?  Could this be the reason why we do not attract the top business people into politics who can earn many times over and above £66k per year?

I wouldn't have left my senior managerial post for such terms & conditions that's for sure!  I wanted, and achieved, a highly paid career in the long term.

I really think the British public should get real about this and pay their political representatives a decent salary to reflect the responsibility they take on that most of Joe Public would never take on themselves. Then we could demand higher standards

No, keep them on the current salary, but give them bonuses for improving the turnover (GDP) and profitability (balance of payments) of UK PLC also taking into account inflation and the international weighting for the pounds exchange rate, ratings in international education, health, lifespan and quality of life. Oh and if they do badly, like bankers defer it up to 5 years so it can be clawed back. The same should apply to senior civil servants. Personally, I think the same should apply to public companies, small salaries, big bonuses for success. Far too many people in senior public and private positions get well rewarded for failure which is topped up with a big payoff to get them to leave. 

The average MP gets about the same in expenses as their salary, which covers many things than a normal workforce would have covered and also subsidised meals, bars etc, not to mention their gold plated pensions, that are worth much more than anybody is the private sector can accrue with the present pensions cap.

So no it is not a particularly well paid job, but MEPs are much better paid, along with many European equivalent of MPS and they are generally are as bad or worse than UK MP's, so quality is not purely a function of pay.

Would I want to be a politician, no chance as I like to do real work creating desirable products and services that people will buy, not just producing hot air.

[Terbs]

No surprise that they quashed the treason laws. Imo, what they are doing amounts to treason
They seem hell bent on stirring the populace up to such an extent that the extreme element will fire off, and demo's turning into riots will follow.

Class that as my equivalent to Enoch's 'rivers of blood' speech

And, as was stated earlier, with reference to salaries....people tend to forget that the MP salary is only a fraction of their total income.