The Chairman Mao resembling, Monarchy hating, threat to Britain, Labour Party thread

[sidcow]

2 minutes ago, bickster said:

The PM is one of the worst paid in the Western World. We're actually setting our politicians up to get headlines like this

Politicians pay needs looking at with sensible adult eyes, they are all poorly paid

That people at the head of government are expected to dress appropriately when representing the country but do so out of their own pocket is also silly

You aren't going to get the calibre of people a country deserves to be running the country by paying them so poorly in comparison to the private sector

The system encourages sleaze

 

And before anyone says it, yes outlaw second incomes if you are a member of parliament just pay them at the level that will encourage some talented people to go into politics

 

Yes. The rules are probably a hangover from when all members of Parliament were aristocracy and richer than creosote. 

Having a low paid person in a position of enormous power is asking for trouble. 

They should be appropriately paid for the high office job they do and understand NO "donations" of any kind are allowed. 

It's suicide for any politician to instigate what would be enormous pay rises though. 

[ml1dch]

25 minutes ago, bickster said:

And before anyone says it, yes outlaw second incomes if you are a member of parliament just pay them at the level that will encourage some talented people to go into politics

All of them?

[bickster]

Just now, ml1dch said:

All of them?

I get the argument about people doing a public service etc but unless the rules are the same for all then you've started off with a grey area and that never is a good start

[ml1dch]

2 minutes ago, bickster said:

I get the argument about people doing a public service etc but unless the rules are the same for all then you've started off with a grey area and that never is a good start

Unfortunately we live in a world of grey areas.

Under the new, comprehensive, no-grey-areas "outlaw second incomes" rule, Nick Thomas-Symonds is now required to donate all the royalties from the sales of his political biographies to charity? Glenda Jackson never gets to stand because she receives residuals from her acting career?

What if you've spent thirty years building up a successful legal or accountancy firm? Cease trading? Seems like quite a risk. What if you're one of those MPs elected in 2015 and then booted out again in 2017? Torching your entire professional career for a year or two as a back-bencher seems like quite a obligation to place upon a potential candidate if we're trying to attract good people to politics.

Ah! So we just stop people working. Receiving existing passive income is alright. Problem solved. 

Spoiler

And now we've fixed it so that Jacob Rees-Mogg would have been fine to earn tens of thousands per annum through his fund management company but Kevin McKenna isn't allowed to do the nursing shifts that he was doing during Covid. Which I assume isn't the result we're aiming for.

 

[foreveryoung]

1 hour ago, bickster said:

The PM is one of the worst paid in the Western World. We're actually setting our politicians up to get headlines like this

Politicians pay needs looking at with sensible adult eyes, they are all poorly paid

That people at the head of government are expected to dress appropriately when representing the country but do so out of their own pocket is also silly

You aren't going to get the calibre of people a country deserves to be running the country by paying them so poorly in comparison to the private sector

The system encourages sleaze

 

And before anyone says it, yes outlaw second incomes if you are a member of parliament just pay them at the level that will encourage some talented people to go into politics

 

Is this joke??

They pay for **** all.

[bickster]

Just now, foreveryoung said:

Is this joke??

They pay for **** all.

Thanks for confirming that my opinion must be veering in the correct direction

[sidcow]

26 minutes ago, foreveryoung said:

Is this joke??

They pay for **** all.

You really think they do **** all?

You think the Prime Minister of the UK is just sitting around all day smoking a pipe and knocking off early?

I'd say it's a fairly unforgiving relentless job.

[blandy]

2 hours ago, bickster said:

And before anyone says it, yes outlaw second incomes if you are a member of parliament just pay them at the level that will encourage some talented people to go into politics

Ordinary MPs are well paid enough, for their jobs as lobby fodder, vote drones and representing constituents by sorting out (sometimes) their problems. So I don't agree that the money isn't enough reward to encourage people to go into politics. Where I do agree is for Ministerial roles, particularly senior ones. Their pay is nowhere near equivalent non-parliamentary roles.

I also don't agree completely about second incomes. It depends on the nature of the second job. A few work in the NHS, some for charitable stuff, some get paid small amounts to write about relevant things in society - e.g. a MP who might be an expert on [whatever] writing an article in [whatever weekly] about that thing. To me, personally, that's fine. It helps the public understand [whatever] better.

There are good arguments against, too, I accept. I think whether you ban it, or allow it there are strong arguments and examples of why a ban/allowing is a good or bad thing. Utter **** being given ministerial roles they're not remotely qualified for - bad, so they wouldn't merit a decent salary comparable with a CEO or whoever. Doctors and nurses being forced to stop practising even part time because they're also an MP.  Relevant current experience and knowledge is useful.

[MakemineVanilla]

2 hours ago, sidcow said:

It's suicide for any politician to instigate what would be enormous pay rises though. 

According to Roy Jenkins, in his book The Chancellors, it is seen as unseemly to make money while in office, and that the rewards are usually expected to arrive when a career is over, in the form of lucrative offers of seats on boards and book deals.

[ml1dch]

2 hours ago, Chindie said:

Starmer took more in hospitality and gifts than all his predecessors combined since they started recording it. 

I don't disagree that this is all a bit shabby, and even more so given the puritan, whiter-than-white brand that Starmer wanted to portray.

But I'm curious as to what you're quoting. "All his predecessors", is that McDonald / Attlee / Wilson / Blair / Brown? In which case I'd be extremely unsurprised and unshocked as I don't think hospitality for politicians was really a thing in the 30s and 40s. 

I assume it's not "every Prime Minister, including noted freeloading scumbag Boris Johnson"? If it is then I would be very surprised and very shocked.  Or is it "every Labour leader combined [but caveat they only started recording this stuff in 2014]". 

Not having a go, just curious about the data behind the point being made.

Edited yesterday at 15:36 by ml1dch

[Xann]

Mogg's Yandex dividends could be paid as Russian bullion into a safety deposit box in Malta.

41 minutes ago, sidcow said:

You think the Prime Minister of the UK is just sitting around all day smoking a pipe and knocking off early?

Remember the blagger the f***witted let in?

 

[bickster]

3 minutes ago, blandy said:

Ordinary MPs are well paid enough, for their jobs as lobby fodder, vote drones and representing constituents by sorting out (sometimes) their problems. So I don't agree that the money isn't enough reward to encourage people to go into politics. Where I do agree is for Ministerial roles, particularly senior ones. Their pay is nowhere near equivalent non-parliamentary roles.

I also don't agree completely about second incomes. It depends on the nature of the second job. A few work in the NHS, some for charitable stuff, some get paid small amounts to write about relevant things in society - e.g. a MP who might be an expert on [whatever] writing an article in [whatever weekly] about that thing. To me, personally, that's fine. It helps the public understand [whatever] better.

There are good arguments against, too, I accept. I think whether you ban it, or allow it there are strong arguments and examples of why a ban/allowing is a good or bad thing. Utter **** being given ministerial roles they're not remotely qualified for - bad, so they wouldn't merit a decent salary comparable with a CEO or whoever. Doctors and nurses being forced to stop practising even part time because they're also an MP.  Relevant current experience and knowledge is useful.

Yeah I'm thinking out loud. I was more talking about ministerial stuff rather than MPs. Yes having looked up similar rates for the lowlies, their wage is fine

[chrisp65]

I can promise all of you now, if you make me PM on over £3,000 per week, I will buy my own shirts.

 

[Chindie]

1 hour ago, ml1dch said:

I don't disagree that this is all a bit shabby, and even more so given the puritan, whiter-than-white brand that Starmer wanted to portray.

But I'm curious as to what you're quoting. "All his predecessors", is that McDonald / Attlee / Wilson / Blair / Brown? In which case I'd be extremely unsurprised and unshocked as I don't think hospitality for politicians was really a thing in the 30s and 40s. 

I assume it's not "every Prime Minister, including noted freeloading scumbag Boris Johnson"? If it is then I would be very surprised and very shocked.  Or is it "every Labour leader combined [but caveat they only started recording this stuff in 2014]". 

Not having a go, just curious about the data behind the point being made.

Major party leader I believe since 2010.

[foreveryoung]

2 hours ago, sidcow said:

You really think they do **** all?

You think the Prime Minister of the UK is just sitting around all day smoking a pipe and knocking off early?

I'd say it's a fairly unforgiving relentless job.

I said pay for f*** all, read again.

Salary may not be great, but it's just pocket money while your living in number 10

[TreeVillan]

3 hours ago, sidcow said:

You really think they do **** all?

You think the Prime Minister of the UK is just sitting around all day smoking a pipe and knocking off early?

I'd say it's a fairly unforgiving relentless job.

*Edit* he already explained himself. 

 

But whilst we're on it, none of our MPs are underpaid. Their basic salary is £90k, piss take we think that's low. 

Edited 21 hours ago by TreeVillan

[tonyh29]

5 hours ago, bickster said:

The PM is one of the worst paid in the Western World.

perhaps the salary reflects the ability then

 

[blandy]

31 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

perhaps the salary reflects the ability then

 

It has done recently - last decade or so

[tonyh29]

there aint half a lot of , "yeah but"  defences going on in this thread considering people have no affiliation to the party under attack  

 

 

 

[bickster]

9 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

there aint half a lot of , "yeah but"  defences going on in this thread considering people have no affiliation to the party under attack  

Not really. I’m not defending Labour it’s not a yeah but. It’s a “our parliamentary system is broken” and this is just another small part of why it’s broken.