Owen Paterson.

No, except they're all at it ala Starmer and Lammy, I have mixed views on the situation really, there should be less mp's but on more money for one, there maybe could be a limit on outside interests so they can go back in to the real world when voted out and the house of Lords should be totally abolished...that do yer..?

 

It was always clear that one of the significant motivators behind Brexit for some Tory MPs was to dodge the EU clampdown on tax evasion.

 

Another reason why we never get anywhere with these types of scandals. Not everything is about Brexit,

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/50168357

https://fullfact.org/online/brexit-not-concealing-offshore-accounts/

Unless we actually know what Cox was doing - and unless it was wrong - then the issue seems to be him using his Parlimentary workspace which I'm not sure links to Brexit in any way.

 

that is genuinely the most serious thing i think you've ever said on here that isn't trying to wind someone up, fair play and i agree pretty much entirely although I don't think they need more money, 82k plus expenses should be enough to attract a calibre of person decent enough to represent people fairly.

 

I honestly don't do 'wind up', I just say out loud what others think...

 

Funny Ive never heard you call yourself a plonker

 

You're dead right but you'll never get agreement on it because too many people think MPs should have to struggle on minimum wage or the average salary of their constituents or whatever. But we don't actually want average people running the country, we want the best people of all walks of life.

At £82k you can't even attract the best headteachers, police superintendents, army colonels or GP let alone anyone with an entrepreneurial, financial or computing background. Someone would have to explain to me how someone who was qualified enough to be the Director General of the BBC would have to take a £360k PAYCUT to help to run the country.

So you end up with 3 types of people going into Politics;

1. Average people who could never hope to earn more than £80k
2. People who have generational wealth where it doesn't really matter whether they earn £80k or £180k
3. People who can supplement their income in other additional ways

None of which are actually good for our politics in the long run.

 

82K gets you Marcus Rashford for 2 days (basic only, not withstanding any bonuses)...

 

Bargain.

 

Do you even need a butler..?

 

Luckily for me there's an MP living next door who helps me out when he's not busy.

 

Do politicians go into the job for the pay or for the extra activities it brings? Or do they go into it to make a difference?
If it’s the latter they are the right people

 

We should all Praise " Modern Labour " , just think after the next GE after the massive landslide Labour victory we will have some superb Front bench MPs :- The delightfully elequent Angela Raynor ( who's outside parliament earnings are being looked at ), the wonderful David Lammy , Diane abbott , Naz Shah , Sir Keir Starmer , Stephen Kinnock
The fringe Corbinisters - Momentum and the Unions . Glad i'm on my last legs with the prospect of this shower in control

 

Nobody goes into it just for the latter, it's idealistic. There's a million easier ways to make a difference with much less stress and sometimes even better pay.

Even if they did, and those individuals would do it for minimum wage, they're unlikely to be the most capable candidates. It's weird to think that politicians are completely separate to the rest of the workforce and driven by different factors.

 

The Salaries of MPs pale into insignificance when compared to the public funded BBC " Stars " , they pontificate about people struggling - food banks - UC - minimum wage - child poverty etc . Yet they pay outrageous wages to mediocre presenters IE lineker on over £1.3 m - Zoe ball £1m + - Andrew Marr £ 500k + - Jeremy Vine £500k + , these parasites are even threatening over 75s with debt collectors , yet they complain about MPs with their snouts in the trough , shocking organisation that should be made to self fund and compete in the real world .

 

Correct , but the salary " package " is poor . the old saying pay peanuts etc etc . We need the best brains in the country to steer us through the current mess . Maybe the best brains from all sides of the Political spectrum . Despite the current Governments unpopularity Labour can't make inroads into the 80 seat majority . That speaks voluums of the current crop of " options " available in Westminster .

 

None. He's definitely a mixture of outlooks 2 and 3.

 

Of course it does. But you'll have to explain to me why a headteacher or a dentist might have to take a pay cut to be an MP.

Is it more valuable to run a school or a surgery or the country as a whole?

Is it more valuable to run the BBC or to be the Prime Minister? Why would the guy who runs the BBC have to take a 300k pay cut to run the country?

If you want to appoint the best then these levels don't make sense.