pslewis

I should damned well think so too!

Come on, who the hell would get out of bed for much less these days?

Have 4 kids and collect benefits would be that, net. You will be better off than the backbench MP's!!

Hell, HeadTeachers are on £135,000 a year with a car thrown in!!

Let's just pay them a decent wage and get some quality in - I say pay them £200,000 basic and then an allowance of £40,000 to pay their wives for being their secretary. Give them the funds to run their office on a cost basis and no expenses to be claimed.

I was shocked to see that they are on just £66,000 a year - that's what the Head of Science at a School is on!! £66,000 is laughably low these days, come on!!

tubbytommy

iTrader: (20)

Isnt that minimum wage now??

pslewis

It depends which industry you are in I guess, £1,000 a day isn't uncommon where I am.

So, yes, from my viewpoint, £66,000 IS an absolute minimum!

ReallyReallyGoodMeat

How about we make their salary as a percentage of the median salary of their constituents?

As a positive side-effect that might stop affluent MPs standing for election in areas they have no affiliation with for an easy seat.

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

No, put them on a minimum, with £100 pa extra for every PERMANENT job they create in their constituency.

And knock OFF £100 for every one that disappears.

chocolate_o_brian

iTrader: (22)

Pfft, 66k, I earn that a month as a fitter on the steelworks

pslewis

That's a very good point.

RobsyUK

iTrader: (2)

I don't see why they shouldnt get it but not yet. Not while we ALL NEED TO STICK TOGETHER (as quoted by the governement) during these hard times.

Once the country is back on the up then sure. You pay peanuts and you get monkeys... Also look at the good ones. The ones that do 18hrs a day and events at weekends.

Maybe an alternative way would be to pay them £65k and then bonuses upto 100k max thus way it would keep them pushing to do the above and beyond acheivements.

stevebt

iTrader: (8)

As they say We're in it together"

David Lock

At least that I would say.

Then they can join the GCC like some on this board.

dl





Greedy C,unt Club

hodgy0_2

i really don't see this as a problem tbh

the negativity of it all is just pathetic gesture politics,

Nick Clegg and Camerloon would better spend their time figuring out how to get us out of this sh1tstorm

stilover

I've said this for a few years now. Give them £150-200k a year and scrap all expenses. These people run the country, so why should they get paid less than people just running a school?

But, ask a bunch of Morons and you get stupid answers. There was some idiot on Facebook a few weeks ago spouting that the PM of Britain should be on no more than £35k a year. That's more than Mr Average gets, so why not. Couldn't see past his minimum wage job.

ReallyReallyGoodMeat

A tautology there.

jonc

Surely it doesn't matter how much you pay them, higher wage doesn't automatically equate to increase quality, you just get well paid monkeys.

hodgy0_2

A man limited by his own aspirations

pslewis

£35,000? That's really funny ..... our end of time Apprentices are on that!

paulr

35kfor being PM. As its an internship for a job at JP Morgan. £2 mill/year 10 days a week, it should be unpaid, like all the best internships.

Blair, 10 years pm no pay, 5 years since leaving office £80 mill. Equals £5 mill average pay per annum.

Pm is the best paid apprenticeship going.

scunnered

iTrader: (1)

How about paying them the statutory minimum wage? They're not worth any more than that anyway.

In my opinion, they should receive no wage at all. They should get basic expenses only, the funds raised in their own constituency. Then we might get decent honest politicians for a change. They would do it for the love of the job, and not because they want to feather their nest.

hodgy0_2

Sort of back to the 18th century

^Qwerty^

Don't forget 1st class rail travel.

ReallyReallyGoodMeat

You think paying them less will attract the more honest? If anything the pool would be narrowed down to the already-wealthy, who'd want all that stress and negative publicity for no wage!?

Luan Pra bang

They should have a minium of 100k.

Carlh

Id rather pay someone decent money for doing a decent job than skimping on paying them for all that pressure. at least if they're getting paid well, well enough not to run their own businesses on the side and be influenced by corporations, we should get value for money.

Leslie

Seems to me that they are on a pretty good deal anyway.

They don't have to turn up for work except for special votes etc. and they dont appear to have any special responsibility except to vote as they are ordered to by their party!

With all those expenses as well they are hardly going to lose out in any way.

Les

jonc

For only spending 150 days in Parliament, months of 'recess' throughout the year, fully expensed and very generous pension arrangements are the electorate getting value for money?

The Trooper 1815

iTrader: (31)

Its an old Labour policy that MPs cannot change.

shooter007

yesss mp= vermin