Gransnet forums

News & politics

Should MPs be able to have another job?

(63 Posts)
CarlyD7 Fri 05-Nov-21 13:00:28

Still reeling from the news that Owen Paterson was lobbying for companies and getting more money for doing that than he was from his MPs salary - but he's not unusual in having another job, apparently. On Question Time (BBC) last night Caroline Lucas talked about her working 70-80 hours per week as a MP and wondered where Paterson found the time for his other jobs. So, should MPs be banned from having another job to prevent conflict of interests & them profiting from lobbying the government, plus to make sure they actually focus on being an MP?

Bibbity Fri 05-Nov-21 13:15:21

No. I believe the only money a representative should receive is the median income of the constituency that they represent.

maddyone Fri 05-Nov-21 13:17:41

I don’t believe Caroline Lucas about her working those hours.

MaizieD Fri 05-Nov-21 13:24:28

maddyone

I don’t believe Caroline Lucas about her working those hours.

Why not?

growstuff Fri 05-Nov-21 13:26:52

maddyone

I don’t believe Caroline Lucas about her working those hours.

I do.

Urmstongran Fri 05-Nov-21 13:31:26

No additional income from a second job would certainly simplify things.

DillytheGardener Fri 05-Nov-21 13:37:23

maddyone I do. One of our Lib Dem MP, was very involved in the local community and when I spoke to their secretary during the MP assisting my MIL in a local constituency matter, they said how hard the MP worked and how she wondered how they ever saw their family.
Our current Tory MP, unlike his predecessor, doesn’t reply to his constituents email enquiries , doesn’t come to local events, in fact does nothing accept be boris’s lackey and vote accordingly, he also is a lobbyist . I can imagine our new MPs hours are nothing compared to our old mps late nights. I will never vote Tory again.

DillytheGardener Fri 05-Nov-21 13:38:20

*except (dyslexic mistake)

DillytheGardener Fri 05-Nov-21 13:39:50

And to answer the OP’s question, no I do not think they should be able to have second jobs no. I think it is conflict of interest.

Gwyneth Fri 05-Nov-21 13:53:34

Definitely can be a conflict of interest so no I don’t think they should have another job. Aren’t they paid enough anyway?

SueDonim Fri 05-Nov-21 13:55:24

A minimum wage job for five hours a week might concentrate some minds in the HoC. A friend recently took a second job as a ‘picker’ at a big supermarket chain, ie fulfilling internet orders. The conditions are appalling, being monitored constantly and harried to do more and more and more. She’s now left as the continual criticism and the feeling that she was never good enough for them wore her down so much. It’s really made me think twice about getting online orders.

Ilovecheese Fri 05-Nov-21 14:28:28

I think if someone has a profession like for instance a doctor, then it is as well that they keep their skills up to date with some part time work.
Otherwise no second jobs, particularly where there is an obvious conflict of interest.

MissAdventure Fri 05-Nov-21 14:38:14

No, because they can't be trusted.

Grantanow Fri 05-Nov-21 14:47:14

No paid lobbying by MP's in any circumstances whatsoever!

Kali2 Fri 05-Nov-21 16:15:19

No outside job, and of course no illegal lobbying.

I totally believe Caroline Lucas and hours.

25Avalon Fri 05-Nov-21 16:17:07

What about being on a Board of Directors or owning your own company? These should count too. Part of the problem is we don’t pay our MP’s enough. If we did then other jobs should be banned.

MissAdventure Fri 05-Nov-21 16:42:45

They only get £80 odd grand plus expenses.
My heart goes out to them.

silverlining48 Fri 05-Nov-21 16:49:25

We don’t pay anyone enough.,.and the rest of us would be thrilled to be paid what MPs are. Lots of people work very hard in difficult but socially important roles yet not financially rewarded, or even much appreciated. No power or glory there.

Historically I think MPs used to have jobs and did unpaid parliamentary work in their spare time. They were then remunerated and gave up their jobs/ professions to solely work as MPs.

I think their basic pay with all the extras they claim is plenty and there will always be those who will dabble in outside business however much salary they get.

silverlining48 Fri 05-Nov-21 16:50:23

X post MissA

MissAdventure Fri 05-Nov-21 16:59:28

smile

MaizieD Fri 05-Nov-21 17:31:26

Historically I think MPs used to have jobs and did unpaid parliamentary work in their spare time.

Historically MPs were younger sons of the aristocracy or they were landed gentry. Or they had inherited wealth. Or were wealthy industrialists. Or had wealthy sponsors. The rationale being that they had the greatest interest in seeing the country was properly run.

Pay for MPs wasn't introduced until the Labour party began to be a political force. 1911

Here's a bit of history:
publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmmemex/1484/148404.htm

Jane71 Fri 05-Nov-21 17:33:26

I have a high regard for Caroline Lucas, and would like more Green MP's. I belive what she said, and I agree with her that MP's shouln't have another job. They definitely shouldn't be receiving money for lobbying for private companies. I thought it wasn't allowed?

Germanshepherdsmum Fri 05-Nov-21 17:39:37

I think they may have to pay for staff etc out of their income but correct me if I’m wrong. If you want good MPs such as the late David Amess then they won’t be attracted by a low salary unless they have a substantial private income as of course many do, or a wealthy or high-earning spouse such as Theresa May’s. I don’t believe having another job per se is wrong but it should not make such demands on an MP’s time that they can’t properly do what they were elected to do.

ayse Fri 05-Nov-21 17:46:47

silverlining48

We don’t pay anyone enough.,.and the rest of us would be thrilled to be paid what MPs are. Lots of people work very hard in difficult but socially important roles yet not financially rewarded, or even much appreciated. No power or glory there.

Historically I think MPs used to have jobs and did unpaid parliamentary work in their spare time. They were then remunerated and gave up their jobs/ professions to solely work as MPs.

I think their basic pay with all the extras they claim is plenty and there will always be those who will dabble in outside business however much salary they get.

I understood that payment for being an MP was instituted so that ordinary working people were able to represent their constituency and have an income as it meant giving up their paid employment in industry. I think they were paid the average of a working man’s income. Members who had other resources were able to keep that income and their other professions.

I believe MPs should not be able to pursue other occupations in addition to being an MP. That’s why we pay them over the National mean income so they can represent us and undertake all their parliamentary duties.

Perhaps MPs pay should be means tested so that only those who need the income receive it. Maybe then there would be less sleaze and more concentrated minds on the problems of today which are many. It would also save the tax payer money.

MaizieD Fri 05-Nov-21 17:56:33

I think they may have to pay for staff etc out of their income but correct me if I’m wrong.

You're wrong.

I suggest that everyone read the link I posted which explains the development of payment for MPs, how the current arrangements were arrived at and what they comprise.

MPs can claim for the costs of employing 3.5 full time staff. Up to £1,115