Doesn't Add Up

[sir.prize]

New proposals for MP’s salary increases being unveiled are expected to see a 12% rise from the current level of £66,000 up to £75,000 in 2015.
Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority chief Sir Ian Kennedy is likely to argue that overall the new package will only be a few hundred thousand pounds a year more costly for the public purse. That is an increase of £9,000 each.
With 650 MPs x £9,000 = £5,850,000.
That is almost six million pounds – somewhat more than a few hundred thousand.
Silly man.

How do these people become MPs and even get knighthoods?

[jackthehat]

Have you taken into account the projected 'savings' and then subtracted them from your figures?

Thought not...........

[jim360]

Did you also include the reduction in costs from cutting allowances, pensions and "golden handshake" fees?

[factor-fiction]

The increases will be offset by other changes. The ones I can remember include a reduction in pension benefits, removal of the late night meal payment for sessions finishing after 7.30 and not paying the 'golden goodbyes' of around £65000 to MPs who lose their seats.

[sir.prize]

PM Cameron doesn't agree with the rise but won't vote against it. Very gallant.

[sir.prize]

This makes more sense . . .

A senior Labour source said: "Our view is clear that any decision about MPs' pay must reflect wider economic circumstances and what is happening in the rest of the public sector.

"It must be consistent with what is happening to nurses, teachers and others in the public sector as well as conditions in the private sector."

[Sqad]

Sir Prize......as far as i know...nobody gets a vote on it.......and even if they did, the payrise could be forced upon the MP's.

[sir.prize]

jim and factor - you are both correct. But £9,000 a year. Some rise that.

[ichkeria]

He (Sir Ian) isn't an MP.
The "overall package" presumably covers more than just the salary rises. So regardless of the rights and wrongs of it that presumably explains the figures.

[bednobs]

I think you'll find they are all falling over themselves to say they don't want the rise, or that they'll give it to charity or whatever. To me that seems so bogus - who would say no (seriously) to a payrise? I think they are all saying no because of the pension benefits etc that they'll lose

[jackthehat]

I must be using that 'invisible font', again..........:o)

[Sqad]

Sir prize

\\\\A senior Labour source said: "Our view is clear that any decision about MPs' pay must reflect wider economic circumstances and what is happening in the rest of the public sector. \\\

You missed out GP's who were given a large pay rise and a reduction in working hours.....no weekends OR night calls....by?.......the Labour government.

[jim360]

Yes it is, and I'm not sure I really agree with it. But your OP seems to be insulting someone's ability to do maths while then demonstrating your own failing to use the figures properly. If you hadn't done that then we'd probably all or mostly be in agreement, but it serves as a distraction.

Next time you are going to try and poke fun at someone's inability to do maths... get it right yourself!

[factor-fiction]

IPSA was set up as an 'independent' body to set the salaries and expenses rather than letting MPs set and vote on their own increases.
If you set up an independent body I'm not sure it makes sense to reject its findings.
It was set up in 2009- by the Labour government- so maybe Labour will be quiet on this issue

[sir.prize]

Good point sqad. Doctors are worth it . . .are MPs?

[sir.prize]

jim630. Calm down dear! There's no need to get irate. You will be bursting a pixel.

Thanks for pulling my OP apart. I can accept that.

But I still think £9,000 is an obscene pay rise in the present economic situation.

Now go and make yourself a cup of tea along with a rich tea biscuit.

PS: Sorry that should be jim360 - I never was good at maths!

[factor-fiction]

I think it sends a the wrong signals to be talking about 12% pay rises when public sector workers have had pay freezes and some in the private sector have suffered reductions. But:
(1) The job, if done properly, carries a lot of responsibilities, involves long unsociable hours and requires skills which could earn much higher salaries outside. I used to earn more than that 5 years ago when working as a manager and I didn't have anything like the responsibilities. It's important we attract good candidates not just those who are already very well off and don't need a good salary
(2) In real terms if MPs salaries have not been increased recently by 2015 it may turn out to be a cut in real terms
(3) Having an independent body was agreed at the time to be the way forward

[jim360]

Not really angry. There was a bit of eye-rolloing going on.

Don't have any rich tea biscuits but will make cup of tea shortly.

[Gromit]

The main problem with the rise is the timing. They do deserve more, but so do other public sector workers. They should not award themselves a huge pay rise now, even if they do give it to charity until the heat is off.

MPs pay and conditions need reforming.


I would:

- pay them more.

- ban expenses all together

- make moonlighting illegal
(when Boris was an MP he was making £250,000 a year from journalism.

- set a minimum and a maximum day.

- shorten the annual summer recess.

- ban all holidays during work time.

- monitor their performance and publish the results

- have a maximam number of absentee days, and dock pay if they exceed it.

[Sqad]

Well....let's put it like this:

How many of you ABERs would turn down a 10% pay rise, whatever the "economic climate?"

Yeaah! right.

[Gromit]

Oh, forgot one.

I would ban Friday as a scivving day. Many MPs take the whole day off to get back to their constituencies. Friday could be a shorter working day, and finish at 6pm.