Truebrit.May 11th, 2009 - 21:28:02

Looks like the 'Honourable' Members are apologising all the way to the bank! Good excuse isn't it. 'I know I'm a venal, greedy shyster but it's everyone else's fault for not stopping me sooner.'

The tax free allowance for a second house alone is £24,000 p.a. A figure not too dissimilar to national average net income. With circa 650 MPs, this works out at £78 million over the five year term of a full parliament. Add to this the other allowances for travel, office and 'research' staff (ie, the missus or other family members) etc, and this figure rises to over £400 million between general elections: On top of a wage bill I estimate at about £270 million.

Nor is this all. Anyone who 'serves' as an MP, for however short a time gets a full, index linked, final salary based pension as if they'd done the job for forty-odd years. Gods know what that's costing us. In addition, many MPs have other jobs too: And when they're kicked upstairs or retire, there's always the possibility of a nice little committee or QUANGO to help keep the wolf from the door.

Ever wondered why oppositions always blather on about the constant growth in the number of QUANGOS (current annual cost to the taxpayer of our more than 900 of them has been estimated at over £100 billion) but never seem to scrap any when they get into power?

So how about this for a proposal. Let them keep the housing allowance, but only if they rent. They should be able to find something reasonable enough for two grand a month, even in London. Better still, let's make suitable publicly owned accommodation available to them and recover the moolah: And that way we'd stop them letting their London pads to each other too, which would be the obvious trick to ensure continued risk-free property speculation at our expense.

If the ones who already own property paid for by us can no longer afford it, tough. They can sell it. To be fair, if they need to unload quickly the state can buy it at current market valuation. In either case, less a deduction of course, based on the amount of our cash they've claimed to support the place. (You know, honourable lads. Like the analogously fair rules you made for when people buy THEIR Council houses at a discount but have to pay back something if they sell again within five years.)

Mileage based allowances for road travel are fair enough and enjoyed by many in the private sector as well: But there are few companies I know of that just give middle managers around £100K each to take on who they want as clerks, secretaries and P.A.s. Let alone Cleaners. So MP's office staff can be seconded from the Civil Service. Without further recruitment too: They can be trawled from existing departments and reduce overstaffing in the process. Yippee! A double saving! See how easy this is!

As for second jobs: Surely, running the country and selflessly looking after one's constituents interests is important enough to warrant giving the matter one's full attention? I think my boss could be a tad miffed if I told him I'd not be in Monday because 'the other place' needed me for a board meeting. So give up your little extra earners, boys and girls, or resign your seats, please.

Finally, to stop them whining on about the need to retain quality people in this one 'profession' which requires no formal qualifications, let's give 'em a pay rise. Set MPs wages at 300% of average earnings and fix them there. Between £85 and £90k pa for a backbencher seems more than reasonable, and should help concentrate their minds on running the economy to make us all better off. If they land us up sh*t creek and earnings fall, they suffer too. As they will if they ratchet up taxes too much! Can anyone say that this is neither fair nor workable?

Report this comment