I’m at something of a loss to understand the plaintive cry
of David Cameron that he cannot do anything about the pay rise proposed for
MPs.
The sovereign government of the UK can do something about
most things that happens in the union, simply by legislating for or against it.
Why not so on this issue.
If Danny Alexander and Gideon Osborne can decree that public
sector workers may only receive a 1% rise in salaries, never mind that they
work for as diverse organisations as Birmingham City Council and The Highlands Health
Board, then it beats the hell out of me that all they can do about MPs getting
an award of 11% is to beat their breast and wail uncontrollably.
But moving on… should they be getting a pay rise?
There are those who would say that good MPs are worth more
that the £66.5 k that they currently receive. Some of them, highly qualified
people, quite rightly point out that they could earn ten times that in industry
(or fifty times in banking).
But that’s not a valid argument. After all, there are many
who aren’t worth anything like three times the average national wage. But it
the job which dictates the salary, not the person. In short you get paid the
rate for the job you do, not the job you think you might be able to do.
The job has a flat rate salary; unlike many other jobs it
demands no qualifications, and it has no salary scale; you start at £66,500 and
you will finish up there, unless you get to be a committee chairman or a
minister.
It seems that the job consists of 3 or 4 parts.
MPs are first and foremost constituency members, there to
help out and advise their constituents with their travails. But it is a sort of
Citizen’s Advice Bureau/social work/facilitator kind of job, often the last
resort when officialdom just won’t listen. MPs’ letters go straight to the decision
makers, not to junior clerks that deal with mail from the public! In truth much
of this work is often done by their administrative staff.
 |
| Busy, right? |
MPs also take part in debates in the chamber, although a
look at the chamber for anything other than showpiece debates, suggests that is
not a full time job. And because of pairing they can travel the world with
never a care for turning up for votes, witness Anas Sarwar undertaking speaking
engagements in Pakistan while important votes were taking place at home, and
Gordon Brown virtually never showing up at all.
Of course some MPs take part in committee work where they
hold ministers or officials to account often to hilarious effect. Sometimes
they seem to hold other members of the committee to account; ask Eilidh Whiteford!
 |
| Princess Alexandra opens something, but it could easily be the local MP |
And finally, they get invited to places to play the role of
minor royalty, opening community centres and hospital wings and the like and
saying a few words.
Some MPs have time to take on a variety of other jobs, from
those who sit on a number of boards of directors to some who work part time as
dentists, barristers, public speakers, quiz show panellists, etc. There are
even the ridiculous ones who take themselves off for extended periods to eat
spiders or wear cat suits in reality tv.
So the questions are: is £66,500 around right for the job,
or should it be more? Would we get a better standard of MP if we offered more
money? If they should get more, is now, when everyone else is restricted to
tiny pay rises or none at all, the right time for an increase?
And given that by law the MSPs and AMs in London, Cardiff
and Belfast are paid a proportion of Westminster’s members’ salary, should the
First Ministers or Mayor try to do something to stop that happening.
What do you think? There is a poll on the right side bar. It was supposed to have an option, 'YES, but not at the moment', which disappeared into the half-world that is Blogger. Apologies. That's why there is a multiple answer option.
 |
| York MP Hugh Bayley makes a donation |
Finally, I note that the BBC was having difficulty finding
an MP who was in favour of the pay rise to appear on the radio this morning. I
wonder if anyone has put his head above the parapet.
I hope that those MPs who have been vociferous in decrying the
rise will be giving the extra money to charity. Maybe the local food bank would
be a good place to start.
