Politicians want a 32% pay increase

1:01pm Friday 11th January 2013 in News

Mid Worcestershie MP Peter Luff says MP salaries should be compared with head teachers or council chiefs Mid Worcestershie MP Peter Luff says MP salaries should be compared with head teachers or council chiefs

MPs are after a 32 per cent pay rise after saying £65,000 a year is not enough.

A new survey has revealed 69 per cent believe they are ‘underpaid’ - with the average parliamentarian asking for £86,250.

One in 12 want more than £100,000 and only six per cent reckon their current pay is too much.

The findings, by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) have been attacked by critics, who say they are “out of touch.”

Mid-Worcestershire Peter Luff did not take part in the survey but refused to criticise the findings of it.

Two county MPs have also said they took a pay cut to take on the job.

Mr Luff said: “People should look at what other people are paid in positions of similar responsibility - look at head teachers or senior council officers.”

Worcester MP Robin Walker added: “I’m inclined to agree with Peter in that the comparison with other jobs is a valid one.

“I do recognise it is an issue the public are very sensitive about though, and I believe MPs should not be allowed to vote for big increases in pay, it is something which should be out of our hands and decided by an independent body, which is where IPSA’s work is important.

“Fundamentally, I took a pay cut to become an MP and the concern comes when you might have a brilliant MP, with a family who might be put off doing it - we do need to attract the best people.”

Around 100 anonymous MPs took part in the survey because IPSA has been tasked by Prime Minister David Cameron with shaking up pay and pensions following the expenses scandal.

Harriett Baldwin, MP for West Worcestershire, said: “As an MP I am paid a fraction of what I earned in the private sector.

“But I do this job because it is a vocation and a privilege and a chance to give something back to society through public service.”

Mr Walker did not complete the survey, while Mrs Baldwin would not confirm either way.

IPSA has already rejected proposals for regional pay, performance related pay, or to take outside earnings into account.

It has confirmed MP’s salaries will rise by one per cent both this year and in 2014, taking it to £67,060 by then. Their pay has been frozen since 2010.

IPSA will publish firm proposals in the spring with a view to adopting any changes from 2015.

Dave Prentis, Unison general secretary, has attacked the findings, saying they are “completely wrong”.

He said: “This poll shows how totally out of touch they are.”

What MPs can also get on top of their salary

- £15 towards an evening meal if the House of Commons sits past 7.30pm

- If they are travelling on parliamentary business, £80 for taxis and £150 per night for a hotel or B&B

- For those MPs outside of London up to £20,000 a year in rent -

Up to £22,000 office costs, travel expenses, costs towards a second home and a pension

Comments(50)

alanquattro says...
1:26pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Firstly there are far, far too many of them. We have tier after tier of political levels of Empire being imposed on us and taxes go up accordingly. Cut the number of MPs by 50%, cut the HofL to 100, then pay them their 95k. Remember there are still 450 MPs left from the last parliament and their redacted expenses do not stand any forensic examination. i.e. they are expense fiddlers.

Report this post »

Andy-Apache says...
1:35pm Fri 11 Jan 13

As I was told when I was a civil servant watching my T&Cs being steadily eroded and receiving minimal pay rises year on year - you don't HAVE to be an MP. If you're not happy, change your career. So I did.

No sympathy. Not worth the money.

Report this post »

Arthur Blenkinsop says...
1:39pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Once upon a time, people went into politics, not primarily for the pay, but for the kudos and for the respect and satisfaction that they earned from doing a good job representing people from all walks walks of life. Yes, good politicians must be attracted from all walks of life, but, with so many completely useless, lack-lustre, already overpaid MPs, won't this proposed salary increase largely be a waste of more tax payers' money?

Report this post »

stu2010 says...
2:18pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Greedy bastards, they want stringing up!!!!

Report this post »

Baldrick1955 says...
2:28pm Fri 11 Jan 13

As someone who has to solely rely on benefits, apart from my DLA or PIP as it is to become, I will get a rise of 1%. OK i'm happy with that as I haven't got a choice, these money grabbing bastards have, if they don't like the heat get out of parliament, no one will miss you.

Report this post »

MJI says...
2:54pm Fri 11 Jan 13

What about council leaders on more than the Prime Minister - THAT is the real issue.

Report this post »

psychoflump says...
2:56pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Pay might be put up in an establishment or company if it is unable to attract people into a role.

I can't say as I've ever heard of any constituency where there have been no candidates standing. There's no need to raise their already massive pay, there are plenty of piggies already lined up to poke their noses in the trough.

Report this post »

Samboy says...
3:19pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Comparison with other jobs is invidious unless they are capable of doing those jobs well. If one compares by equivalent situation should not all pensioners be on the same payment.

Report this post »

worcswolf says...
3:59pm Fri 11 Jan 13

If you look into their salaries on the parliament website you'll find that get expenses paid for food electric buying phones 2nd homes which when they sell they keep the money even though the taxpayer subsidises them. In total they really earn six figure sums has they claim everything back.
They pay for nothing if I go to work I have to pay to get their and all my food. The only poor looking MP I can remember was Michael Foot these claims are ridiculous and shows the contempt these public servants have or other public servants like the army and police.
Pay freeze they preach the Worcester news should publish the MPs expenses claims makes good reading.

Report this post »

Landy44 says...
4:34pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Comparing MPs salaries with other inflated public sector salaries isn't a useful measure.

Remuneration in the real world is generally dependent on the level of responsibility, performance and results.

As voters and tax payers we should consider ourselves the shareholders of UK plc and on that basis the MPs work for us as the executive carrying out our wishes.

Taking that approach, I'd be cutting some salaries and firing some poor performers.

If anyone really wants to understand the idiocy of our political system, they should look into just how some of our MPs become MPs and their prior roles and track record. Don't dwell on it too long, it will just make you feel ill when you understand how poorly qualified and with little experience most of them are!

Report this post »

pudniw_gib says...
5:32pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Thieving scumbags.

Report this post »

courtesycall says...
5:43pm Fri 11 Jan 13

If local and county councillors offer themselves for election so they can work for nothing, how come MPs can't do the same? Surely it would be cheaper to just pay their expenses, and scrap salaries altogether.

Report this post »

TDH123 says...
5:51pm Fri 11 Jan 13

An MPs present salary, although not meagre, is certainly one that dissuades some individuals from pursuing a parliamentary career serving the electorate. Perhaps a higher salary might attract higher calibre candidates?

Report this post »

courtesycall says...
5:58pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Higher calibre candidates aren't likely to be financially motivated; more likely they're looking for job satisfaction and personal fulfilment which isn't likely to be gotten from an electorate and media that expects MPs to be at their beck and call and holier than thou!

Report this post »

Jabbadad says...
6:38pm Fri 11 Jan 13

The problem lies from those who well may be better suited to represent the voting public by means of having work experience or even life experience itself who don't get a look in, instead we have those from a well off back ground straight into private schools and then to universities that have, and still do pander to the rich, to then be selected by the local political party committee, who themselves are true to party politics and not the people, and then finish up in parliament where the cronyism is stronger still, says why we have such a disconnected bunch of financial expenses twisting morons in government.
And we will never change this until we have compulsory voting. The people have the power they just don't know how to use it. In fact the Grey Vote alone if organised could stand politics on its questionable head.

Report this post »

grumpy woman says...
7:02pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Apart from all the expenses they are entitled to, becoming an MP opens doors to future highly paid jobs and directorships, appearances, speaking etc.

Report this post »

Jack the Giantkiller says...
8:14pm Fri 11 Jan 13

How can they claim to understand the concerns of ordinary people when they start to make claims like this? Robin Walker says he had to take a pay cut to be an MP on 65k a year plus generous expenses. No one made him become an MP, and how can he ever appreciate those of us working hard for twenty per cent of that money.

Report this post »

Whhaasaap says...
8:22pm Fri 11 Jan 13

You know what MP stands for….mental people nuff said!

Recession = Mega pay rise for MP’s and Council leaders, I’m Flabbergasted!

Report this post »

Mr Analysis says...
8:32pm Fri 11 Jan 13

"We are all in this together" (unless you are an MP)

Day #1 Lets take more money from the poor guys and cut benefits for the disabled and force them low lifes into work we just cant afford to keep them.

Day #2 Guys, we need a pay rise our expenses, interview money, TV appearance money and wage just is not enough.

Sums it up fairly nice.

Report this post »

pudniw_gib says...
10:27pm Fri 11 Jan 13

I would like that sort of money but I am not that cynical.
To get into this club you have to be immoral enough to follow the party line even if it means screwing your constituents.
Few of them live in the real world. Even at local council level there are plenty of snouts in the trough. I look around and see the corruption and blatant ignorance of the meaning of tax payers money. They will put up a bit of sculpture costing thousands of pounds then close youth services down.
We have a government selling off assets and sacking policemen and then wanting to award themselves more money!!
We are not all in it together, the ordinary man in the street is well in it, those at the top do not understand or just dont care.

Report this post »

marklewisbcfc says...
11:00pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Oh my heart bleeds, life must be so hard them only earning what they do, they really aren't in the real world are they mp's and they really are out off touch with working people and yet they want our vote, we'll they can f***k right off, they're not interested in us they're just in it for themselves! They are vile disgusting scum the lot of them!!!

Report this post »

CJH says...
11:22pm Fri 11 Jan 13

courtesycall wrote:
If local and county councillors offer themselves for election so they can work for nothing, how come MPs can't do the same? Surely it would be cheaper to just pay their expenses, and scrap salaries altogether.
If MPs work for no salary then they would have to be independently wealthy. Do you want a parliament full of David Camerons?

Report this post »

pronstar says...
1:21am Sat 12 Jan 13

worcswolf wrote:
If you look into their salaries on the parliament website you'll find that get expenses paid for food electric buying phones 2nd homes which when they sell they keep the money even though the taxpayer subsidises them. In total they really earn six figure sums has they claim everything back.
They pay for nothing if I go to work I have to pay to get their and all my food. The only poor looking MP I can remember was Michael Foot these claims are ridiculous and shows the contempt these public servants have or other public servants like the army and police.
Pay freeze they preach the Worcester news should publish the MPs expenses claims makes good reading.
Apparently 35% of the last lot were guilty of fiddling their expenses.

Report this post »

TDH123 says...
6:20am Sat 12 Jan 13

There seem to be many bitter and envious WN readers!!

Report this post »

Vinny1982 says...
8:34am Sat 12 Jan 13

I don't know what there complaining about, they should try living on £25k a year and paying taxes & bills, instead of living in luxury. ALL OF THEM SHOULD BE CAPPED AT £40k, it's the doctors and nurses who should be paid more than them not these silly little MP's & Council Directors!!!

Report this post »

Worcester Lad says...
10:04am Sat 12 Jan 13

Quite agreeVinny 1982 my wife and i earn just under 30k between us,but we scrape by,we will also get a small pension when we retire.I think it should be 1 MP = 1 county

Report this post »

The Doosra says...
10:34am Sat 12 Jan 13

What a bunch of windbags you lot are! Try living in a country where there are no politicians - where "government" is at the point of a gun: I think perhaps your views might change. At least we can vote to change our politicians.

It has to be said though that our MPs have brought a lot of this odium on themselves. The controversy over MPs expenses is simple to solve - simply scrap them but pay higher salaries, they can then manage their own affairs within a fixed budget like the rest of us have to do.

Report this post »

CJH says...
10:58am Sat 12 Jan 13

Worcester Lad wrote:
Quite agreeVinny 1982 my wife and i earn just under 30k between us,but we scrape by,we will also get a small pension when we retire.I think it should be 1 MP = 1 county
How is that going to help? Population of Greater London - 8+ million, population of Rutland not even 40 thousand! Hardly fair or representative!

Report this post »

Jabbadad says...
11:01am Sat 12 Jan 13

I think that you find that all those who claim / whine that they took a substantial salary cut to enter politics, still have business connections outside of parliament and get LARGE payments for a few hours work or simply for name association on Boards etc and probably one of the reasons that the political system has placed them where they are, (which of course is business led for the Tories & a mix of union & business led for Labour, as for LIB/LAB/DEM/TORIES they just forage around for scraps from anyone's tables).
So if they want a huge unfounded, immoral wage increase then they should get this from savings as they do in their business thinking world, and within local government, and have some CUTS in numbers of MP's.
Now I'll VOTE fo that.

Report this post »

mr.meldrew says...
11:54am Sat 12 Jan 13

they should try living on an old age pension.....

Report this post »

Casmal says...
12:28pm Sat 12 Jan 13

Jabbadad wrote:
The problem lies from those who well may be better suited to represent the voting public by means of having work experience or even life experience itself who don't get a look in, instead we have those from a well off back ground straight into private schools and then to universities that have, and still do pander to the rich, to then be selected by the local political party committee, who themselves are true to party politics and not the people, and then finish up in parliament where the cronyism is stronger still, says why we have such a disconnected bunch of financial expenses twisting morons in government.
And we will never change this until we have compulsory voting. The people have the power they just don't know how to use it. In fact the Grey Vote alone if organised could stand politics on its questionable head.
Well said. If only people would use their powers and make their views known to their MPs - and Councillors on a regular basis.

Report this post »

Casmal says...
1:03pm Sat 12 Jan 13

Whatever the rights or wrongs of MPs pay, this is not the time to even be considering any kind of rise. Virtually everyone is suffering a reduction of income at the moment, be it from pay, pension, savings or benefit. We are told this is necessary because of the dire financial straits of this country. In that case, there is no money to give MPs a pay rise.

There is also the point that many of the MPs who did so much to cause the financial mess are still in parliament. And ..... these are also the MPs who have actively promoted performance related pay in the public sector......

Let's have a little less if "Don't do as I do, do as I say" and a little more of "What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander."

Report this post »

Casmal says...
1:04pm Sat 12 Jan 13

Whatever the rights or wrongs of MPs pay, this is not the time to even be considering any kind of rise. Virtually everyone is suffering a reduction of income at the moment, be it from pay, pension, savings or benefit. We are told this is necessary because of the dire financial straits of this country. In that case, there is no money to give MPs a pay rise.

There is also the point that many of the MPs who did so much to cause the financial mess are still in parliament. And ..... these are also the MPs who have actively promoted performance related pay in the public sector......

Let's have a little less if "Don't do as I do, do as I say" and a little more of "What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander."

Report this post »

Casmal says...
1:04pm Sat 12 Jan 13

Whatever the rights or wrongs of MPs pay, this is not the time to even be considering any kind of rise. Virtually everyone is suffering a reduction of income at the moment, be it from pay, pension, savings or benefit. We are told this is necessary because of the dire financial straits of this country. In that case, there is no money to give MPs a pay rise.

There is also the point that many of the MPs who did so much to cause the financial mess are still in parliament. And ..... these are also the MPs who have actively promoted performance related pay in the public sector......

Let's have a little less if "Don't do as I do, do as I say" and a little more of "What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander."

Report this post »

s1lversurfer says...
4:42pm Sat 12 Jan 13

Reduce the numbers by at least half - no 2/3 rds - make it a full time job no second, third or more jobs. Pension only by how many years in job. No 'severance' pay - if they lose their post they lose their job and that's it..
We have to move with our jobs we don't get another home - so live near the job and include expenses in their salary.
THEN only THEN might they deserve a small pay rise and only as much s everybody else is getting..

Report this post »

Rob Peachey says...
5:47pm Sat 12 Jan 13

By all means give the MPs a pay rise - the same pay rise they have promised to the public sector workers 1%.

Report this post »

peetajon says...
8:33am Sun 13 Jan 13

I have no repect for many of our MPs but I believe that MPs generally have been substantially underpaid for a number of years. They do have a very demanding and intrusive and important job and their pay is much less than they could get in other demanding occupations.
If we pay them a more competitive salary then we are likely to start attracting a better standard of MP because we certainly do not get that now - but we should also cut down on their un-earned fringe benefits such as their excessive pensions.

Report this post »

CJH says...
10:33am Sun 13 Jan 13

s1lversurfer wrote:
Reduce the numbers by at least half - no 2/3 rds - make it a full time job no second, third or more jobs. Pension only by how many years in job. No 'severance' pay - if they lose their post they lose their job and that's it.. We have to move with our jobs we don't get another home - so live near the job and include expenses in their salary. THEN only THEN might they deserve a small pay rise and only as much s everybody else is getting..
So you want all major decisions and laws made by about two hundred MPs? As I said to a previous comment, how is that fair or representative of the nation as a whole? Some of you seem to want to go back several hundred years when a few rich men made laws which only served to maintain class and economic divisions in society (although this Government seems to like that idea). Yes, do something about those who take advantage of being an MP, make the rules tighter, and enforce them, but for goodness sake let's apply a little logic instead of emotional, kneejerk, badly thought out suggestions!

Report this post »

Casmal says...
11:48am Sun 13 Jan 13

CJH wrote:
s1lversurfer wrote:
Reduce the numbers by at least half - no 2/3 rds - make it a full time job no second, third or more jobs. Pension only by how many years in job. No 'severance' pay - if they lose their post they lose their job and that's it.. We have to move with our jobs we don't get another home - so live near the job and include expenses in their salary. THEN only THEN might they deserve a small pay rise and only as much s everybody else is getting..
So you want all major decisions and laws made by about two hundred MPs? As I said to a previous comment, how is that fair or representative of the nation as a whole? Some of you seem to want to go back several hundred years when a few rich men made laws which only served to maintain class and economic divisions in society (although this Government seems to like that idea). Yes, do something about those who take advantage of being an MP, make the rules tighter, and enforce them, but for goodness sake let's apply a little logic instead of emotional, kneejerk, badly thought out suggestions!
Well, said.

Report this post »

markAFCW says...
1:58pm Mon 14 Jan 13

Harriett Baldwin is paid "a fraction of what she earned in the private sector". Ummmmmmm........

So if it is a vocation for her, how much is enough for this woman? Her arrogance beggars belief.

And in these days of transparency from MPs, how refreshing of her not to confirm or deny whether she completed the survey in the first place.

Report this post »

SgtAl says...
10:27pm Mon 14 Jan 13

If they are not happy they should bear in mind there are people who would be willing to represent their constituency for less. Personally I would be willing to stand for £50k. I work alot more hours, in some horrible places, at their behest, for alot less than that.

Report this post »

SgtAl says...
10:27pm Mon 14 Jan 13

If they are not happy they should bear in mind there are people who would be willing to represent their constituency for less. Personally I would be willing to stand for £50k. I work alot more hours, in some horrible places, at their behest, for alot less than that.

Report this post »

garopt says...
12:57pm Wed 16 Jan 13

If they wish to regain any respect they should volunteer for a pay cut. Simple as that.

Report this post »

Jabbadad says...
3:00pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Anyone who defends the politicians at Westminster want to take a serious ;look in the mirror. The majority have been getting quite large additions to their £65,000 by way of Housing allowances, travel allowances staff allowances, (and while employing the wife at a reasonable wage for doing a couple of hours a week). So they have been dipping in the trough for as long as they can get away with it, and some are still doing it. And most have another job because they are MPs.
As to their political ability, and loyalty to this country, How long have you got.
So no matter the support they get from the party members on here we could comfortably get rid of ONE THIRD, and as said on here give them the same 1% wage increase as the rest of us.
Today Cameron at Question Time was spouting the rises pensioners got last year, what he omitted was that they also encouraged Social Housing landlords to put up rents by the ,maximum amount to save Government subsidies. So gave a £5 pension increase and took £3.50 back in one hit, and the pension credit was also reduced, plus they, the Government, took £50 off the Winter fuel allowance, and withdrew support for the essential Tariffs which kept fuel prices low. Now it's gone, Gas and Electricity have gone up over 20% to those less well off. And the new Warm Front scheme allowance is a promise in the sky, when you apply you are told you Might get it. Some promise. Do I believe these politicians , LIKE HELL.

Report this post »

Lew Smoralz says...
8:41pm Wed 16 Jan 13

courtesycall wrote:
If local and county councillors offer themselves for election so they can work for nothing, how come MPs can't do the same? Surely it would be cheaper to just pay their expenses, and scrap salaries altogether.
You have been out of circulation for a long time! City and County councillors are paid.

Report this post »

Lew Smoralz says...
8:48pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Over 40% of the laws introduced in the UK come from Brussels, not from the UK Parliament. These whinging MP's are now just glorified local councillors to the EU government.

It seems to me that with the reduction in their responsibilities they should be taking a salary cut of 40%!

Report this post »

Lew Smoralz says...
6:53pm Thu 17 Jan 13

My apologies, please. I have learned today that it is 70% of legislation that emulates from Brussels.

A 70% pay cut, or a reduction in their numbers by 70%.

That is how it works in the real world. If my work load was reduced by 70%, then my boss would want severe changes as well.

Report this post »

pronstar says...
8:30am Fri 18 Jan 13

Lew Smoralz wrote:
My apologies, please. I have learned today that it is 70% of legislation that emulates from Brussels.

A 70% pay cut, or a reduction in their numbers by 70%.

That is how it works in the real world. If my work load was reduced by 70%, then my boss would want severe changes as well.
Who told you that? More Lies Vicar?Load of rubbish mate. The truth is that nobody really knows and 'estimates' range from 7% to 80%, depending on what agenda you are following, and whether you are talking about primary legislation, statutory instruments or regulations.

Report this post »

Lew Smoralz says...
11:51am Fri 18 Jan 13

The EuroMove web site, an EU funded project, states that “Over the years many claims have been made about the proportion of UK laws that have their origin in the EU. For example, Tony Blair, in a 2004 speech to the CBI when Prime Minister, claimed that "half of all major new regulation comes from the EU"; the important qualifier in that phrase, "major", did not feature in the many subsequent uses of the 50 per cent claim. Indeed, the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, had claimed in his Pre-Budget report in 2003 that "half of all regulations emanate from Europe".

It is obvious that Europhiles will claim that the EU has little effect on our Democratic government, but if the unlamented Labour Party Prime Ministers, who like the current Labour party are committed to a United States of Europe, confirm 50% then it must be much higher than that!

Report this post »

pronstar says...
1:11pm Fri 18 Jan 13

Since when did anyone believe what Blair or Brown, or indeed any other mainstream politician say?

When it suits them to believe it, that's when.

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree