End of term report for current government

While I agree that the awarding of a 10% payrise to MPs while the rest of the public sector, including the civil service who support/do all the work in government departments, is insensitive, I think we do need to look at the bigger picture. If people were not paid a reasonable salary to be MPs then we would possible be left with only those for whom the income is irrelevant. i.e. those with a private income or inherited wealth, or those who are fully sponsored by trade unions who could then call the tune. This would mean little representation for those of us in the middle. I do think that there needs to be more tightening of the expenses, an MP representing a constituency where the majority of his electorate are commuters ( maybe within M25) should not be able to claim for a London home, and their pension scheme is unyieldingly generous, but as a salary, I dont think £74,000 is excessive given the responsibility and hours they work. I do wish however, that they would drop this pretence of the IPSA being independant

Message deleted by Gransnet for breaking our forum guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

Bez, about the health bill; Prior is not a junior minister. He used to be the head of the CQC and he is definitely someone who wants the NHS to be funded differently. He is Jim Prior's son. He used to be a Tory MP for Norfolk.
The government seems to have forgotten that the King's Fund set up an enquiry into financing the NHS, and came up with results that the government did not like, so they appear to be trying to forget about the Barker report into funding the NHS.

www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/new-settlement-health-and-social-care

I've only come across her recently, dj, and that she talks sense is, on the whole, my impression too.

I saw her on the news programme, 130, one night last week, discussing the next days papers, bags.
She makes sense.

Please do, Grannyonce.

There was an independent body which said that nurses, teachers, etc., should get a pay rise of 1%. The government decided to override the ruling of that body so that some nurses, teachers, etc., do not get the pay rise recommended by that body.
They were okay about overriding that, so why not override, IPSA?

Are these facts right?

According to @fleetstreetfox:

"IPSA is so independent that its board are chosen by the Speaker of the House of Commons, who is an MP. They are approved by the Speaker’s Committee, which consists of MPs.

Its budget is approved by MPs. Its rules were written by MPs. And it exists for, because of and on behalf of those MPs – which means that IPSA is about as likely to cut them down to size as I am to willingly limit my oxygen intake.

The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority is about as independent of parliament as the tides are of the moon."

just to add - I am so bored and irritated by the senseless scaremongering/inaccuracies shown on this and other political threads - bowing out now.

"The pay rise for MPs is something which is seen to be perhaps not entirely politically sensible at the moment. Still in an age of austerity, still paying down the deficit, restrictions on public sector pay.

But that said, it's an independent body, IPSA, that's doing it. Their assessment is that MPs are underpaid but that they had far too many generous allowances.

So what they've decided to do is have a series of reforms that don't cost the taxpayer a penny more. So for example, MPs will have a restructured pension scheme and lose some of their expenses, such as for evening meals.

IPSA says this is a very sensible package, but it comes at not a very sensible time if you're an MP, because it looks as though you're getting more than 10% while your constituents are probably having their pay restrained. "

not the government - do get your facts right

I don't agree with a 10% pay rise. To the public servants who basically run the country, nurses, teachers, court services to name a few it is a kick in the teeth. As the previous posts above indicate, austerity does not affect everyone.

I work in the public sector and job required qualifications (masters level) plus being a chartered member of an organisation (to show competency of subject field). Do I earn £67k plus a year? Do I heck! Will I get a 10% payrise, nope and probably won't even get the 1% as top of my salary scale and the organisation I work for tries to given those on lower grades a larger increase while giving those on a higher grade nothing or a non consolidated amount that, once the tax has been removed, it's worth the paperwork.

Am I angry that MPs are getting a 10% increase - you better believe it. Austerity affects everyone my backside...if your Daddy paid for you to go to Eton and you're an MP, it seems you are exempt from all these austerity steps being forced on the rest of the general public. Absolutely disgusting and a kick in the face for all the public sector workers that are at the lower end of the salary scales working 50xs harder than these b..... Just to make ends meet.

Last night an MP said "we deserve this money - if you don't pay MP's well you'll end up with only rich people and those who can't do anything else"
Doesn't say much for the rest of us does it?

I agree with your first line whitewave it's enough to make you sick. Although the salaries paid by the BBC to all the so called celebrities (Chris Evans, Jonathon Ross, Graham Norton etc.) are far higher and would be the first to be cut if I had my way !

A lot of people do not earn enough some not enough to feed themselves and 7K extra a year is like kicking a dog when it is down.
Being an MP is a reasonably responsible job but they have no qualifications except the gift of the gab. Compare this to so many professions. There are many people in the UK would make exceptional PM's or MP 's. The gov.ernment has the full support of an excellent civil service and paid support in the form of researchers etc. They think of an idea however daft or undemocratic and the civil service is put to work to make it workable. They are then able to present it as all their own work.!!!

As Bez said this payrise was announced prior to the election and I agree that given the current economic situation it is not appropriate at this time.

The PM earns £142,500 DG and I personally think he deserves every penny of it. Not just DC but any PM. I wouldn't have their job and level of resposibility for a £million never mind £142,500 !

As for the "greedy git" I don't think many (if any) MP's actually do enough to earn £67,000 (plus all the various expenses they con).

This pay rise was announced way before the election and the MPs the. Said it was not right at this time - it was said at the time that it would not be paid nail after the election - why could the pay board dealing with this not change their minds as the the amount if increase and down grade it to fit in with other categories of people.
Did anyone else see the report yesterday about a new Health bill being announced to the Lords via a very junior minister no one has heard of - going down the private/insurance route - can't remember where I saw it now but the report said how the mainstream media had kept it under wraps too.

On the radio this morning Cameron said he'd accept the payrise.

Why does that make him any better than the other greedy git? He gets paid a lot more in the first place.

The government has gone against review bodies into other sections' pay rises. Why can it not go against its own review body?
Double standards again.

Off to see the Magna Carta exhibition in Durham now. Government has already got rid of one of the three remaining clauses by holding secret courts without a jury for some people. Only two left now, the church and London. They obviously will not get rid of those, because the left would quite like them to.

That's not entirely true DJ I watched that interview last night. DC said he did not agree with the pay rise at all. The reporter asked him if he would be donating his ( rise) to charity and he said "I already give to charity" the reporter pressed him to say whether he would be donating the entire rise to charity and he would not answer.

On the subject of the "do you feel sorry for him?"
No I bloody well do not. Greedy old git ! Perfect example of another one who wants to try living in the real world.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/i-never-expected-to-be-watching-the-pennies-at-my-age-and-yet-this-is-what-i-have-to--meet-the-tory-minister-whose-67k-salary-wasnt-enough-10394440.html

Do you feel sorry for him?

No I am afraid that the rise smacks of hypocracy, as public servants like nurses teachers etc are being held to 1%.
I am afraid that David almost certainly held this back until after the election so I am afraid his integrity is once again under question. I am also aware that he is being disingenuous when suggesting that the pay rise is out of his hands.

Cameron has just been reported as saying that the pay rise will enable MPs to give more money to charity!

Does he get a better grade for that idea, whitewave?

www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs/richard-grimes/government-moves-to-consider-nhs-user-charges

What about the fact that they are trying to get us to pay twice for the NHS? Prior is going to set up another enquiry into it, despite it not being in the manifesto.

A PostScript

10% payrise seems somewhat excessive given the poor performance so far.