egafd.com

Considering your regional Tesco's manager will earn more, I don't see anything wrong with the pay rise. In fact, ?120,000pa is reasonable when you take into the account the responsibility they have.

Give them ?120,000pa and do away with the expenses, completely.

Aha they want expenses as well!!

Pay them the average wage plus 10%.

Your idea wouldn't work - a London MP (in your world) would be paid ?120,000 with no exes so they would have no need to pay for two homes and their only travel would be on an Oystercard. They would end up with quite a lot of the ?120k after tax.

On the other hand Gameshow Charlie Kennedy would be paid ?120,000 and have to pay ?20,000 or so each year travelling between Westminster and his constituency plus find somewhere to stay while in London all out of his own pocket. In effect, he would be paying to be an MP. He'd end up with a lot less than someone who represents a London seat.

Also, for the majority of the 650 or so... what responsibility do they have?

"Pay them the average wage plus 10%."

That plan would have them queueing up for the job of MP. Err, or maybe not.

Ah but then politicians say (or at least many of them do) that they do the job because they want to serve the public not because of what they can get out of it... Let's see how many want to serve the people if they get paid slightly more than the "people".

Anyway, the fewer politicians or wannabe politicians the better - there are far too many of them to start with.

"Ah but then politicians say (or at least many of them do) that they do the job because they want to serve the public not because of what they can get out of it..."

Ah yes, anyone who states a sense of public service should have their pay cut by over 50%.

I look forward to this approach, not for MPs of course, in the next Tory election manifesto.

There's never a shortage of candidates at elections wanting to become an MP.

Isn't an over supply of candidates for a job a reason to drive down the salary in Tory-land?

I think we should cap their pay rises at 1% per year for the next three years.

I didn't say that they should have their pay cut. I said that they should get paid the average wage plus 10% in the first place.

Would anyone miss them if there were 200 MPs rather than 650-odd?

No.

Would anyone worry if there were only 200 peers sitting in the House of Lords rather than the 850 +?