Just been chatting to an MP who represents a marginal seat who tells me it would be "suicide" for him and other MPs facing a close fight at the next election to vote for an inflation-busting pay rise.

My heart bleeds. Poor dears.

This was after Harriet Harman had announced to MPs that the Senior Salaries Review Body's recommendations on MPs' pay, pensions and allowances will be published next Wednesday and then MPs will vote on them on January 24.

The review body is expected to recommend that MPs' pay should go up by nearly 10 per cent over three years, from £60,675 to about £66,500, with a 2.8 per cent hike in April followed by index-linked rises in the next two years.

She also delivered a stern lecture, telling MPs the Government would table alternative proposals and that since they are paid out of the public purse they should be subject to the same disciplines as the rest of the public sector.

In other words, MPs will be expected to accept a below-average pay rise, like police, nurses, prison officers and town hall staff.

For good measure, Ms Harman told MPs this year is likely to be the last time MPs get to vote for their own pay rises and hikes in their pension and allowances.

I'm always struck by just how packed the Commons is when MPs are voting on their own pay and perks, compared with a near-deserted chamber for many other debates.

Snouts in the trough?

Rest assured, when the vote comes on January 24, Sky News will publish on our website a list of shame of those MPs who reject the call for restraint and vote for an inflation-busting pay rise, while police and nurses are having to make do with less than two per cent.

Comments

[Victor, NW Kent 15 Jan 2008 14:00:32]

Effie and Madnurse

I am with you on this. The puzzling thing is that TV crews can go into the sink estates of Manchester or Liverpool and immediately find gangs of youths who will brandish their guns or meat axes to show what hard men they are. Ross Kemp does that as well as TV news.

Why is it the police cannot find them and arrest them for carrying illegal weapons?

In parts of London one can see, in broad daylight, drug bosses on street corners with several mobile phones and children with bike or motor scooters coming and going to service the punters. Why can the police not see them?

I think the police should have received the pay award that was arbitrated. After all the inflation in food prices is running at 7% and fuel of all kinds at over 15%.

I also think the entire policing system needs a drastic overhaul, rethink and remodelling. It would seem that some county Chief Constables are a little short on top, it seems that the Ministers responsible have been quite poor quality, it seems that the amount of red tape exceeds the quantity of handcuffs.

We also hear that at least 205 backbenchers will support an inflation busting pay rise for themselves. Cameron is opposed and wants their gold-plated pensions to be restricted as well. How many supporters will he and Brown have on this?

[Effie 14 Jan 2008 18:33:19]

feel we need to stop taking the current PC attitude to crime in London that is favoured by the current administration and introduce a zero tolerance attitude to the gang culture and all the misery and crime it brings, with real punishments for those convicted of such crimes.
The authorities know the names of these gangs, so why not make membership of them illegal and enforce it?

Posted by: Madnurse 14 Jan 2008 13:06:24

I agree Madnurse but not only London it should be Nation wide.

[Peter, Fife 14 Jan 2008 14:31:23]

There is a clear possibility that the best candidates for the post of MP do not necessarily warm the benches in the House of Commons.

“...The watchdog created to clean up British politics at the height of Tory sleaze is to investigate whether its work has gone too far and is now deterring people from taking up public office.
The watchdog created to clean up British politics at the height of Tory sleaze is to investigate whether its work has gone too far and is now deterring people from taking up public office.
A decade after the Committee on Standards in Public Life was set up, its chairman Sir Nigel Wicks said he would review whether the whole anti-sleaze process had become "disproportionate".
The committee was created by John Major in 1994 in the wake of the "cash-for-questions" scandal which led to the resignations of the Conservative ministers Neil Hamilton and Tim Smith. The issue came to dominate the Major government and the Labour Party exploited it to the full before Tony Blair swept to office in 1997...”
Published: 16 January 2004 (Independent)

In this modern world you realistically get what you pay for unless you are the subject of a con man; MPs salaries need to be added to their expenses and their Westminster perks to fully appreciate just how much many of these individuals who are mostly interested in their own personal benefits cost voters.

We could start with their subsidised eating and drinking at the Palace of Westminster.

We could then look into members of an MPs family who are employed in the offices of MPs and paid from by the public purse.

MPs voting for their own pay rise has always been an anathema.

[Madnurse 14 Jan 2008 13:06:24]

Morning Post:

I agree with you as I stated in my post. The position of MP is now a full time job and all MPs should be expected to treat it as so.
Really talented people can earn far more than an MP's salary, does this mean we will continue to attract those that are not capable of surviving in a proper profession? Should we raise MP's salaries to attract better people? Perhaps we could change an old saying; Those than can do,those that can't become MPs, just a thought.

Effie:

You may be right. I can only speak as I find and I find Mr Johnson does a good job here as our MP. How he would do in say the People's Republic of Brent, we can only speculate.
I cannot understand why he would want to be Mayor of London, London is going the way New York went a couple of decades ago with high knife and gun crime and lack of achievement in many areas. Yes it is true that there are parts of London that are exempt from the problems and many areas are very affluent, however the bad parts are bad. Perhaps London really needs a Mayor like the former Mayor of New York that introduced zero tolerance of crime and helped clean up the city somewhat.
I feel we need to stop taking the current PC attitude to crime in London that is favoured by the current administration and introduce a zero tolerance attitude to the gang culture and all the misery and crime it brings, with real punishments for those convicted of such crimes.
The authorities know the names of these gangs, so why not make membership of them illegal and enforce it?

[Effie 14 Jan 2008 09:43:13]

Madnurse 11 Jan 2008 16:59:50

Madnurse, regarding you own MP Boris Johnstone, I watched him in a discussion with Ken Livingstone and Brian Paddock.
He was a disgrace. He would not allow anybody else to answer, he rambled, he never stuck to the point and he flustered and blustered the whole time. Nobody could hardly get a word in edgeways.
I know he is a Maverick but it will amaze me if he wins. I do not doubt he could do the job, what I do doubt is his commitment to it. I do not think he could settle in any one given job. His mental state and behaviour reminds me of a jack-in-the-box. He probably is a good MP in a very affluent part of the Country, he would be a disaster around inner city and deprived area's where people are not quite so prosperous.
Having said that nothing is beyond the realms of possibility these days.
The man is a buffoon, London would do well to be absolutely sure who they eventually elect.

[The Morning Post 14 Jan 2008 09:19:33]

Madnurse

Performing the duties properly of a constitutional MP is a full time job, thats why it attracts full time pay and perks! No serving MP should be allowed to persue outside interests of any kind. Pure and simple!

[carol-ann livepool 13 Jan 2008 14:49:43]

Although I don't agree with MPs voting for their own payrises, I do agree with the money they receive in wages. I think it isn't a lot compared to what they could earn in other jobs.

They have to have other jobs not only to keep in touch with the real world, but also, I suspect, only the most devout would choose to be an MP on their basic salary which is much less for a comparable job in industry or the city.

Instead it would be better (although not in the present climate) for them to recieve a higher salary in exchange for totally focusing on their parliamentary and constituency work.

I doubt many people could stand up to the pressure, stress and intrusions into their private lives that MPs and Ministers have to endure.

Parliament is one of the few places outside a zoo where you can see Darwinianism in action.

[Eddie Allen 12 Jan 2008 12:15:31]

They should have pay cut !
No way on this earth are they worth 3 times the average wage earner, and no way is Brown worth 188 grand a year in addition to other perks which are obtainable only as a politician. They are not serving us they are serving themselves.

[Madnurse 11 Jan 2008 16:59:50]

Effie:

I think this issue is above party politics and hence why I said MPs of ALL parties.
The days when the post of MP was considered part time work are long gone. My own MP here in Henley, has other interests but still appears to do a good job however, I do believe that once elected, an MP should only have that one post. There are too many oportunities for the press and others to question reasons for decisions taken by that MP and I beleieve that those that make the law should be whiter than white and ABOVE suspicion and while they have conflicts of interests, they cannot be above suspicion in my view.
The human animal, like all others, is self centred, my husband says humans have a selfish gene that some can keep in check better than others, apparently it relates to our survival instincts which I suppose are not so relavent these days.

I believe many in our country have become followers of the greed is good religion.

[Effie 11 Jan 2008 16:35:11]

The other question I would like answered is, when an ex high ranking politician or civil servant leaves their post and big international companies offer large salaries to them for very part time posts, are these companies recruiting them for their expertise in the company's field or for their contacts? In my view, if it is the latter, which I suspect it is, then is it any better than cash for honours or bribery in a third world country?
Madnurse 11 Jan 2008 12:35:46

I agree with this part of your post Madnurse and I would like to ask this question also.
Does this apply to most Tories especially those on the Front Benches who are being paid to sit on Boards and have umpteen directorships.
I know this also applies to a few Labour Party MP's but it is rife amongst Tories and some of the Salaries they are earning are worse than noses in troughs, they are greed personified.

[David Boothroyd 11 Jan 2008 12:54:56]

Oh dear Victor, touched a nerve there I think! You seem to be under the misapprehension that, when Parliament is not sitting, MPs are not working. Wrong. MPs work 80-hour weeks both in Westminster and in their constituencies.

For the record I'm not a full time activist, I work for a living. As a councillor (I was a successful candidate, top of the poll actually) I would gladly hand over responsibility for setting the rate of allowances to someone else who would set a fair rate, but the law requires that it be a decision by the full council.

[The Morning Mail 11 Jan 2008 12:44:46]

Jon it will be very interesting indeed to see how many MP's vote for the pay rise. I understand Cammers was given a very rough ride at a parliamentary meeting as many of his MP's seem to be reluctant to agree with the Prime Minister.

[Madnurse 11 Jan 2008 12:35:46]

It always amuses me to see someone on a high salary telling others on lower salaries that they must accept a lower settlement or not to be so greedy.
When I was working and I was told by the top brass that I would have to exercise restraint in my expectations of pay increases, I would always say that I was happy to accept two per cent, providing it was two per cent of the person telling me to exercise restraint's salary rather than two percent of my nurse's salary.
Perhaps MPs could do the same and ask for two percent of Ms Harman's salary or Mr Brown's. Perhaps the police would be happy with one point nine per cent of Ms Smith's salary.

The other question I would like answered is, when an ex high ranking politician or civil servant leaves their post and big international companies offer large salaries to them for very part time posts, are these companies recruiting them for their expertise in the company's field or for their contacts? In my view, if it is the latter, which I suspect it is, then is it any better than cash for honours or bribery in a third world country?
Politicians of ALL parties benefit from the knowledge and contacts they have made during their term of so called public service, is this right? If these companies are going to benefit from an ex politician's friends and contacts, should they not also take over some of the other costs incurred by the tax payer, for example the security costs of say an ex PM or minister? Just a thought.

[Victor, NW Kent 11 Jan 2008 12:21:13]

"Could you list the (a) pay and (b) expenses, for each of the last five years, of Adam Boulton, Jon Craig, Glenn Oglaza and Peter Spencer?

So that us readers can weigh objectively your comments on how MPs should manage on their pay".

Posted by: David Boothroyd 11 Jan 2008 12:03:11

Boothroyd - sorry you have joined us. Sky journalists are not paid by the taxpayer. Their jobs are full-time - they do not get 84 day breaks.

Even you, a full-time Labour activist, failed candidate and intermediary between property developers and certain Councils, must see there is a difference between their accountability and that of MPs whom we pay.

[The Morning Post 11 Jan 2008 12:19:14]

David Boothroyd

I doubt that the Sky journalist you refer to get to vote through their own pay rise! In fact i dont know of anyone but politicans who do! Do you? Furthermore they have to produce a receipt for every penny spent on expenses in order to comply with Inland Revenue directives! MP's dont for some strange reason! I would'nt mind if they were honest upright citizens beyond reproach but its pretty obvious from recent events that they are far from that!

[David Boothroyd 11 Jan 2008 12:03:11]

Could you list the (a) pay and (b) expenses, for each of the last five years, of Adam Boulton, Jon Craig, Glenn Oglaza and Peter Spencer?

So that us readers can weigh objectively your comments on how MPs should manage on their pay.

[David - Sussex 11 Jan 2008 10:53:38]

We all know that MP's will vote themselves a pay rise - they have manifestly failed to take account of the peoples view over the past decade - so don't expect them to find any sensitivity when their pockets are involved - shame on the lot of them!

[Khalid 11 Jan 2008 10:52:56]

Ofcourse they will "Duran Duran" towards the chambers just to further milk the public financial coffers, despite indeed the most humurous events they put before us all. One thing I do find bewildering is the fact they want to lead, have no idea, and always turn to the very public to get things right. If they are worth the penny they earn, then perhaps they ought to lead by their own standards, reject any pay rise and stand by their word they do it for country and not money. So, dont "Save Prayer" and lets gets the rails moving.

[Elizabeth Davies Cape Town 11 Jan 2008 09:45:35]

Wait for it folks, the next thing the Blairs will want to acquire is a title..Lord and Lady Blair! They have all the money sp you know want will be next on their wish list.

[Fluffy, London, England 11 Jan 2008 06:31:04]

Is Blair off the public payroll...? Are we, either directly or indirectly via the EU or UN, paying his upkeep as the "Middle-East Peace Envoy"?

Aside from his pension - which he himself agreed upon - to which he is entitled to, are we taxpayers not picking up the security costs of the former whats-it? And have we not already paid for the investments [sic] that the B-liar is now reaping from the private-sector?

One knows that this has always been so in politics, and Blair is just the most openly opportunistic example of such practices. However one feels that the cost of the Blair family to the taxpayer should be made open to the public, as the Royals have been forced to, And by no less then the little European detractor!

Maybe someone knows where this information can be attained from...?

[carol-ann livepool 11 Jan 2008 00:54:38]

Well, Jon, here's a first: I agree, absolutely, with everything you say, here.

I would have thought it would go without saying that they couldn't possibly get a pay rise above other public sector workers - and Harriet, at least, has got a bit of common sense to see, when others in the past have not, that it really is ridiculous for MPs to vote for their own pay deals!
There should also, it seems to me, be some formal assessment or performance indicator system for MPs -
I am sure most work very hard but there are some that don't seem to do anything much at all.
It is, indeed, disgraceful that so many important debates are poorly attended.

[Bruce Hulmes / England 10 Jan 2008 19:32:28]

Perhaps we should pay them on results.
For example the;
Home Secretary could get her salary docked for not meeting Home Office targets a suggested say 10% per quota missed

Meeting deportain quotas 10%.
Enough room in our prisons 10%
Fall in crime 10 %
Fall in drug offences 10%.
Fall in asylum seekers 10%.
Miss information 10%
Missed deportation of illegal immigrant figures 10%.
This could be applied across the board to other cabinet idiots and liars.

[Barry UK 10 Jan 2008 19:19:28]

Snouts in the trough all of them!
They deny the Police an arbitrated settlement.
Then they threaten to vote themselves an above inflation pay settlement
The Police cannot by law go on strike, I wonder if anyone would notice if our MPs went on strike!
Its no wonder that the Police federation are going to ballot members for the right to strike.
Somehow I think not!

[Victor, NW Kent 10 Jan 2008 18:30:43]

MPs should get the same pay increase percentage that the government gives to police and nurses.
Brown pointed out only yesterday that he would have loved to give them more but it would trigger inflation.

[Effie 10 Jan 2008 17:41:38]

To pre-empt the barrage ..yes I know Tony Blair is entitled to a pension, but no he is not being paid as an MP or being employed by the tax-payer.

[Baskerville 10 Jan 2008 17:36:53]

Dear, oh dear.
First, pensions are calculated at RPI, not CPI, so would therefore increase by 4%+ this if things are still the same in September, when the increase is calculated.
Second, the independent review is recommending that MPs receive 2.8% this year, then inflation for two years, not 10% this year as some are suggesting. That is a little over CPI inflation, but only marginally. And MPs have had below-inflation increases for the past three (I think) years.
Third, maybe Jon could enlighten us about his salary compared to an MP's.
Fourth, presumably the Prime Minister will ensure Scottish MPs get the full amount, just as Scottish police and health workers will, unlike their English colleagues.

[Effie 10 Jan 2008 17:25:18]

It should be calculated in exactly the same manner as our State Pensions are.
perhaps that would concentrate a few greedy minds.

[Effie 10 Jan 2008 17:10:17]

Most have other day jobs for the cream on top, just like Tony.
Posted by: Elizabeth Davies Cape Town 10 Jan 2008 16:13:19

Elizabeth, Tony is no longer a Politician so he can take on whatever job he wishes, we still live in a free country and the British tax payer does not pay him.
When he was a politician he had one job and one job only an MP, even before he became leader of the opposition, prior to becoming the PM.
Far less Labour politicians have outside interest, it is mainly Tories who do.
IMHO none of them should have paid outside interest, they take a full time wage and they should work full time or resign and allow others who are willing and able to do so.
I do not condone this practise no matter where it comes from, I think it is fraudulent.

[David Boothroyd 10 Jan 2008 16:58:28]

It's long overdue to hand the actual decision on MPs pay over to someone else. Now can the law be changed for us councillors? Whenever the issue comes up I have to make the point that it's no use criticising us for setting the level of our allowances when it's actually a legal duty which we can't transfer. It would be much easier to have an independent body actually set the rate.

[Merv. Beszant, Dubai 10 Jan 2008 16:38:03]

Maybe they should pass a law preventing M.P.'s from striking, just in case some of them summon up enough energy to suggest such action when they are not happy with the proposed salary increase!

[Elizabeth Davies Cape Town 10 Jan 2008 16:13:19]

I don't think too many MP's are worried about their pay out of the public purse. Most have other day jobs for the cream on top, just like Tony.

[The Morning Post 10 Jan 2008 16:06:37]

Jon

So much for good governance! Can you name any other large organisation or company where Managers/Directors get to vote through their own pay rise? No neither can i! This lot also get to choose their own standards watchdog and sack them for doing the job properly, whilst voting through on a nod and a wink, inflation busting increases in salary, expenses (no receipts required of course) and perks! And the great thing about it is, they are mostly parttime workers! Many have other paid jobs besides their parliamentary work. Full time pay and perks part time work! Makes you sick does'nt it!

[Jon, cephalonia, greece 10 Jan 2008 15:59:04]

Everything in Britain costs between 5% and 10% more than it did last year, but for most (if they are lucky)get a 2.5% pay deal. Just look at the Police and the tight a*** deal that they were offered the other week.

For polictians though its another world, they do not have the same worries that the every day man in the street has. When the energy companys announce that they are putting up the price of their Gas/Electric by 25 plus percent, they dont raise an eyebrow.

For you the hard working tax paying voter, they will just carrying on milking you. If Sid James, Kenneth Williams and co were still alive they could of made a very funny film about it.

I take my text from the gospel of John Presscott, look after oneself and sod the people who trusted us with the country.

[Peter Chuah, Birmingham 10 Jan 2008 15:53:13]

Yes, 'do as I say not what I do'. Selfish desires and being hypocritical comes to mind immediately. With a hope of getting a good pension for life at taxpayers when they retire, of course!