The UK General Politics Thread Page 117

  • Page

    of 202 First / Last

  • glaeken 5 Jul 2013 15:56:39 11,199 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    I think they should actually reduce their wage. If it's too highly a paid job it encourages the wrong sort to go in for it. Give them good expenses for real expenses which would be a very strictly defined list and introduce harsh new laws for political corruption. If we take the idea that political service is the path to wealth out of things it would help no end with our leadership problems.

    Edited by glaeken at 15:59:40 05-07-2013
  • TheSaint 5 Jul 2013 15:59:39 14,495 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    It isn't really that well paid though is it? Plenty of people in the public sector are on far more than MPs.
  • Dougs 5 Jul 2013 16:03:30 68,061 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Don't get me wrong, Most MPs work bloody hard and do a valuable job (other than for their constituents). But it just feels wrong given the climate we're in.
  • TheSaint 5 Jul 2013 16:05:23 14,495 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    Yeah it does send out the wrong message.
  • glaeken 5 Jul 2013 16:09:56 11,199 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    You know I often hear this talk about MP's working bloody hard but it always makes me wonder about just what the deliverables are for an MP? As far as I see it the main thing they have to make sure of is that don't get involved in some sort of scandal. If they manage that then if they survive or not will probably be down to the prevailing wind and how it is going for their particular faction rather than anything they do.

    I am convinced an MP could actually do nothing at all after getting elected and survive for as long as their party is popular and they don't get caught having sex with a goat.
  • TheSaint 5 Jul 2013 16:11:30 14,495 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    In some parts of the country you could probably get caught shagging the goat and still get re-elected.
  • RedSparrows 5 Jul 2013 16:51:49 22,906 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    glaeken wrote:
    You know I often hear this talk about MP's working bloody hard but it always makes me wonder about just what the deliverables are for an MP? As far as I see it the main thing they have to make sure of is that don't get involved in some sort of scandal. If they manage that then if they survive or not will probably be down to the prevailing wind and how it is going for their particular faction rather than anything they do.

    I am convinced an MP could actually do nothing at all after getting elected and survive for as long as their party is popular and they don't get caught having sex with a goat.
    Er, defending/attacking policy successfully? Resolving disputes and problems of constituents? Changing the running of the country?!
  • President_Weasel 5 Jul 2013 16:56:51 9,383 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Lots of people work bloody hard and get less. Cleaners work bloody hard and get fuck all.

    MPs knew how much the job paid going in, and in a financial climate in which they're slashing government support for councils and therefore denying pay rises and forcing job losses to plenty of people who work bloody hard, exempting themselves from austerity is all kinds of bullshit.

    We're all in this together, you cunts.


    MPs' wages should be linked to the average wage in this country.
  • Deleted user 5 July 2013 17:02:18
    MP's job really isn't that hard. It's everyone around them that does the real work.
  • glaeken 5 Jul 2013 17:09:36 11,199 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    @RedSparrows And how many of them are actively involved in defending/attacking policy? How many just sit at the back hoping not to be noticed? I am not sure even how much of a service defending/attacking policy really is being as it boils down to seeing what the other guy has said and seeing if there is a way to spin it so it sounds like a bad idea and make themselves more popular in the process.

    Even if we accept that some things are important and need combative political debate on the subject I still think the majority of what they argue about is nonsense. Most of it really does not matter and a lot of the times there are multiple approaches to dealing with any issue and things rarely boil down to the binary choices of right and wrong that our political parties make them out to be.

    As for doing stuff for their constituents that is not a service I have ever received from an MP. I honestly imagine the only people who would write to their MP for something are the type who will ring up to complain about something they have seen on TV. So basically if they are serving anyone it's probably the moaning minies of the community.

    Edited by glaeken at 17:12:15 05-07-2013
  • Deleted user 5 July 2013 17:15:29
    Post deleted
  • Mr_Sleep 5 Jul 2013 17:20:20 17,097 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    If you could guarantee a drop in corruption and pandering to business interests then I am reasonably amenable to the proposition. Although really they get paid quite a reasonable wedge anyway so I don't see why they can't bring in anti-corruption legislation while they are kept at their current wage. Further to that, if it's all about the money I am not sure those people should strive for office anyway.

    You are a factory of sadness.

  • Destria 5 Jul 2013 17:23:05 2,836 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Compared to their American counterparts, MPs don't earn much.

    It's all very well saying that they shouldn't be motivated by money, but where should the line be drawn in that argument?

    Considering the scrutiny they're under, and the total lack of job security, I sure as hell wouldn't do the job they do for the money they make.

    Not to mention that loads of people in financial services earn more than that in London (and probably elsewhere, but I can only speak for the London market).

    Of course, the flip-side is that a higher salary would probably attract more "career politicians"

    Edited by Destria at 17:24:43 05-07-2013
  • MightyMouse 5 Jul 2013 17:51:29 1,133 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    Their American counterparts are pretty much proof that paying more doesn't get you better candidates or stop them being in thrall to anyone who'll give them money. And everyone gets little compared to people in financial services. The only way that disincentivises people from becoming MPs is if they're moving from financial services, and looking at the number of MPs from that background it's not a big problem.

    If we want to make being an MP a viable option for more people, surely we should look at the problems of the selection process rather than just sweetening the deal for those who can already get past that barrier?
  • Destria 5 Jul 2013 17:58:11 2,836 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    As has been pointed out, many people in the public sector earn more than MPs. Financial Services was just an example (and I don't mean all bankers with 1m bonuses here, I'm including accountants 2-3 years post-qualified).

    My brother worked for Croydon Council for ages, and some of the people he knew there were on 60k+ and were absolutely useless.
  • Mr_Sleep 5 Jul 2013 17:59:56 17,097 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 13 years ago
    @Destria our economy is nowhere near that of the US so that's not really comparable.

    My issue is that politics should be a place for exceptional or driven people to make a difference for us the people based on their ideology or belief in a cause. The money should be a benefit, not the drive itself. I'm probably being a bit too optimistic to think this would ever be the case anymore.

    You are a factory of sadness.

  • mcmonkeyplc 5 Jul 2013 18:05:31 39,464 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    The problem is that they haven't been getting paid enough for awhile but now is exactly the wrong time to change it.

    They should at least try and defer it till the next parliament.

    Come and get it cumslingers!

  • Destria 5 Jul 2013 18:06:00 2,836 posts
    Seen 4 hours ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    The per-capita GDP of the UK vs US isn't that far off. 38k UK vs 48k US (according to a swift google), and that's what we should be comparing, rather than overall size, so I don't think it's an unreasonable comparable.

    I do agree that the US example isn't perhaps the best to follow though, given how f*cked up their politics are.

    Interesting BBC article from 2009:

    Linky

    Taking Italy out of the equation (I don't think we should really follow their example) we're not that far off. Interesting.
  • RedSparrows 5 Jul 2013 18:30:13 22,906 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    glaeken wrote:
    @RedSparrows And how many of them are actively involved in defending/attacking policy? How many just sit at the back hoping not to be noticed? I am not sure even how much of a service defending/attacking policy really is being as it boils down to seeing what the other guy has said and seeing if there is a way to spin it so it sounds like a bad idea and make themselves more popular in the process.

    Even if we accept that some things are important and need combative political debate on the subject I still think the majority of what they argue about is nonsense. Most of it really does not matter and a lot of the times there are multiple approaches to dealing with any issue and things rarely boil down to the binary choices of right and wrong that our political parties make them out to be.

    As for doing stuff for their constituents that is not a service I have ever received from an MP. I honestly imagine the only people who would write to their MP for something are the type who will ring up to complain about something they have seen on TV. So basically if they are serving anyone it's probably the moaning minies of the community.
    I'm glad you're around to put the wrongs of parliamentary democracy right. God, let's just elect a 5 personteam and be done with it.
  • Dougs 5 Jul 2013 18:59:11 68,061 posts
    Seen 3 hours ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    You'd be surprised how many MPs sit on the various committees, participate in debates, meetings on behalf of constituents, host various functions etc. I'm sure there are some that do the bare minimum but there are hundreds and hundreds that do an awful lot.
  • MightyMouse 5 Jul 2013 19:24:04 1,133 posts
    Seen 5 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    @Destria But why shouldn't other people in the public sector earn more than MPs? They very arguably have more important jobs. The fact that some people earning 60k+ are useless is neither here nor there really, the question is whether the job is worth that amount.
  • Deleted user 5 July 2013 19:58:52
    With the insane amount of expense allowances MPs get I think they are more than fairly remunerated. I do at the same time think there is an argument for them to be paid more though. Just being based in London alone doing the job they do diminishes their 60k+. I've got a 24 year old friend in London earning 76K in a graduate job.

    But now is absolutely not the right fucking time to be doing that. It is beyond stupid and insensitive.
  • Bremenacht 17 Jul 2013 13:35:21 18,459 posts
    Seen 14 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    They're at it again.

    Primary pupils in England could be ranked nationally at 11.

    More Performance Management culture, creeping out of the corporate workspace and into schools. Why not scrap teaching qualification altogether and have teachers trained in business management instead. Can't possibly go wrong. (And if you think it could, you're fired)
  • Bremenacht 17 Jul 2013 13:39:56 18,459 posts
    Seen 14 hours ago
    Registered 8 years ago
    mowgli wrote:
    With the insane amount of expense allowances MPs get I think they are more than fairly remunerated. I do at the same time think there is an argument for them to be paid more though. Just being based in London alone doing the job they do diminishes their 60k+. I've got a 24 year old friend in London earning 76K in a graduate job.

    But now is absolutely not the right fucking time to be doing that. It is beyond stupid and insensitive.
    I mostly agree, but there's one question I've not seen asked or answered anywhere on that subject, and that's whether the changes would save money (through the reduced pension, golden goodbye etc). If it does, then I say grasp the nettle. They'd almost certainly be exposed to more scrutiny by the press as a result, which would be even better. Assuming the Levenson laws don't end up proscribing MP's remuneration as a 'private matter' of course.

    @mowgli Have you read the 'In the Back' section of the most recent Private Eye on the matter of Legal Aid?
  • Moot_Point 17 Jul 2013 14:59:05 4,179 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    Where the hell are the government going to cut another 19 billion pounds from? Article.

    ================================================================================

    mowgli wrote: I thought the 1 married the .2 and founded Islam?

  • RedSparrows 17 Jul 2013 15:30:08 22,906 posts
    Seen 2 hours ago
    Registered 7 years ago
    Trident!

    Glad I solved that for us all, let's go have tea.
  • MrDigital 17 Jul 2013 15:35:41 1,866 posts
    Seen 2 months ago
    Registered 4 years ago
    Politician's Pay by Country.

    Note: The x-axis represent ratio of politician-wage to average-wage.

    Formerly TheStylishHobo and Geesh.

  • Moot_Point 17 Jul 2013 15:42:16 4,179 posts
    Seen 6 hours ago
    Registered 2 years ago
    @RedSparrows
    Pfft. You really think that? How exactly do you not fall through the clouds you live in??? :p

    ================================================================================

    mowgli wrote: I thought the 1 married the .2 and founded Islam?

  • Deleted user 17 July 2013 15:58:45
    Bremenacht wrote:
    mowgli wrote:
    With the insane amount of expense allowances MPs get I think they are more than fairly remunerated. I do at the same time think there is an argument for them to be paid more though. Just being based in London alone doing the job they do diminishes their 60k+. I've got a 24 year old friend in London earning 76K in a graduate job.

    But now is absolutely not the right fucking time to be doing that. It is beyond stupid and insensitive.
    I mostly agree, but there's one question I've not seen asked or answered anywhere on that subject, and that's whether the changes would save money (through the reduced pension, golden goodbye etc). If it does, then I say grasp the nettle. They'd almost certainly be exposed to more scrutiny by the press as a result, which would be even better. Assuming the Levenson laws don't end up proscribing MP's remuneration as a 'private matter' of course.

    @mowgli Have you read the 'In the Back' section of the most recent Private Eye on the matter of Legal Aid?
    I haven't, got a link?

    This legal aid issue is something that winds me up every time I read about it so I will probably regret asking.
  • Page

    of 202 First / Last

Log in or register to reply