snowychap Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 (edited) 8 hours ago, meregreen said: So that’s 7 hours a week he won’t be representing and working for his constituency then. ... will he be surrendering 7 hours a week of his Parliamentary salary. I don't think this is ever a good approach to the MP second (or third or fourth) job debate. We should never imagine that an MP is or has to be working 168 hours a week for their constituency/constituents. The dodginess of the ex-minister being paid a large amount of money for a nominal amount of 'time worked' (for which read access to someone who obviously still has some pull) is well worth bringing up, however. Edited September 17, 2020 by snowychap 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post chrisp65 Posted September 17, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted September 17, 2020 4 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 I agree Jacob, the Plebs should stop whinging, get a group of 30 together and go Grouse shooting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 16 hours ago, StefanAVFC said: It’s not his fault someone is giving him £100k for a few hours work. The company who are planning this need to be named and asked what their motivation is, because it’s not due to his excellence in the area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 5 minutes ago, Genie said: it’s not due to his excellence in the area. "We've got this government project, it's not very lucrative, and there's no exit clause. We really need to just **** it up so badly they revoke it." "I've got just the guy" 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meregreen Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 8 minutes ago, Genie said: It’s not his fault someone is giving him £100k for a few hours work. The company who are planning this need to be named and asked what their motivation is, because it’s not due to his excellence in the area. It might just as well be handed over under the table in a brown envelope. Shocking that this kind of corruption is allowed today. Or does anyone seriously think they are paying for his enormous organisational and business acumen. If the salary offered by Parliament doesn’t suffice, then don’t run for office . Too many of these bastards on the make. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 There is a problem, but I think all that will be achieved by preventing MPs having second jobs is pushing the corruption further below the surface. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 If there were a gameshow with two boxes: one with Failing's 100K and the other mystery box containing Javid's annual bonus at JPM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 22 minutes ago, meregreen said: It might just as well be handed over under the table in a brown envelope. Shocking that this kind of corruption is allowed today. Or does anyone seriously think they are paying for his enormous organisational and business acumen. If the salary offered by Parliament doesn’t suffice, then don’t run for office . Too many of these bastards on the make. This is what I was getting at. The employing business need to be asked why they are paying so much money for so little work, when he’s actually disgraced himself in this field of work already. Name and shame them all for effectively “buying” a public official. This is the only way this practice will stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 Think I'm with @meregreen on this one. IMO politicians should be significantly better paid, but with the stipulation that they can't do any outside work during their time in office. I know it'll never happen, but it would be better from a corruption standpoint. I have to say that my assumption is always that 'jobs' like the one Grayling has got here, and multi-million pound deals for former politicians to do some after-dinner speeches, are forms of payment for 'services rendered'. Maybe I'm too cynical. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrenm Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 3 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: Think I'm with @meregreen on this one. IMO politicians should be significantly better paid, but with the stipulation that they can't do any outside work during their time in office. I know it'll never happen, but it would be better from a corruption standpoint. I have to say that my assumption is always that 'jobs' like the one Grayling has got here, and multi-million pound deals for former politicians to do some after-dinner speeches, are forms of payment for 'services rendered'. Maybe I'm too cynical. Yeah, people always moan about the amount MPs are paid. I don't think it's enough. Many IT consultants in London get paid more than MPs and they don't have to suffer the pressure, potential for targetted abuse, concerns for safety and unsociable hours that MPs do. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 (edited) 9 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: Think I'm with @meregreen on this one. IMO politicians should be significantly better paid, but with the stipulation that they can't do any outside work during their time in office. I know it'll never happen, but it would be better from a corruption standpoint. I have to say that my assumption is always that 'jobs' like the one Grayling has got here, and multi-million pound deals for former politicians to do some after-dinner speeches, are forms of payment for 'services rendered'. Maybe I'm too cynical. I think all this would do is lead to far more agreements of "there's a well-paid job waiting for you once you quit politics". I don't think it'll reduce quid-pro-quo, but what it will do is make it far less obvious what's going on while the politician remains in office. In theory, at least the electorate could kick Grayling out if they disapprove of this kind of agreement. Edited September 17, 2020 by Davkaus 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 Looks like the Tory plan is to attack Biden for his comments around the GFA. Not entirely sure it's a wise move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted September 17, 2020 Author Moderator Share Posted September 17, 2020 2 hours ago, HanoiVillan said: IMO politicians should be significantly better paid A lot of people take that view, many of them politicians. It's always difficult to comment on the wages for other professions and jobs, but I struggle with the notion that they are underpaid in the main. A basic back-bencher gets £82 grand. plus pension, plus very generous expenses. If they have a formal role - as a secretary, cabinet member, PM, opposition role etc. they get a further salary of between 23 grand and 80 odd grand. I suppose for the senior roles, they are perhaps underpaid in comparison to other jobs with high levels of responsibility, but...generally, no for me for the normal MPs. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meregreen Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Davkaus said: I think all this would do is lead to far more agreements of "there's a well-paid job waiting for you once you quit politics". I don't think it'll reduce quid-pro-quo, but what it will do is make it far less obvious what's going on while the politician remains in office. In theory, at least the electorate could kick Grayling out if they disapprove of this kind of agreement. But it would be illegal, and therefore a criminal offence. Corruption in its many forms will only proliferate more if we turn a blind eye to it. These people are quite simply being bought. Think of it another way. If High Court Judges we’re being paid retainers, everyone would be up in arms because they are supposed to enforce the law without fear or favour, and quite right too. But Politicians make those bloody laws, ideally without undue bias. is that not in danger from what are basically financial inducements from vested interests. Edited September 17, 2020 by meregreen 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post chrisp65 Posted September 17, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted September 17, 2020 My MP earns £79,500 for being an MP. When he was Wales Secretary, he ‘earned’ an additional £67,500. So a total govt salary of £147,000. As far as I can see, the only thing he ever did as Wales Secretary that there is a record of, was to rename the second Severn crossing as The Prince of Wales Bridge. Awesome. When he had to resign as Wales Secretary due to another of these tory sex pest scandals, he received ‘compensation’ of £17,000. He also works as an ‘advisor’ for a PPE supply company, earning an additional £15,000 for a maximum of 70 hours work. There is absolutely no need for someone that was on a six figure salary, plus expenses, supposedly running two jobs, to then have a third job in an industry directly benefitting and involved in current government purchasing. It’s scandalous. Some MP’s earn more than enough for the skills they bring to the game. Some are just blatantly on the take. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 36 minutes ago, blandy said: A lot of people take that view, many of them politicians. It's always difficult to comment on the wages for other professions and jobs, but I struggle with the notion that they are underpaid in the main. A basic back-bencher gets £82 grand. plus pension, plus very generous expenses. If they have a formal role - as a secretary, cabinet member, PM, opposition role etc. they get a further salary of between 23 grand and 80 odd grand. I suppose for the senior roles, they are perhaps underpaid in comparison to other jobs with high levels of responsibility, but...generally, no for me for the normal MPs. I'm aware it's not a popular suggestion, but it would have to be combined with real enforcement of taking no outside work. If people don't want to change the system, that's absolutely fine and a valid opinion, but then they should shut up about Chris Grayling, because he's not doing anything he's not allowed to do. Why wouldn't he take the job, and why wouldn't they offer it to him. This is the system we currently have, working fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choffer Posted September 17, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted September 17, 2020 1 minute ago, HanoiVillan said: I'm aware it's not a popular suggestion, but it would have to be combined with real enforcement of taking no outside work. "I wasn't working, I was merely socialising with Big Pharma" responded Matt Hancock. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted September 17, 2020 Share Posted September 17, 2020 1 minute ago, choffer said: "I wasn't working, I was merely socialising with Big Pharma" responded Matt Hancock. Why would he be being paid for socialising? I'm confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted September 17, 2020 Moderator Share Posted September 17, 2020 2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: Why would he be being paid for socialising? I'm confused. Nobody said he was being paid but he was socialising with them over drinks that they paid for (hypothetically of course) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts