Should MPs be able to have another job?

They should definitely have to declare all unearned income as well as earned income. Maybe could work in public service, such as the doctor MP who works in her local A and E at the weekends, but not for private companies.

I woke up and couldn't get back to sleep, so looked through the list of MPs' interests.

It appears that any money which is earned from paid work has to be declared and the amount given.

However, money from property, shares and investments over a certain value have to be declared, but there is no monetary value given. I suspect this group are earning a higher income than those who are doing some actual work.

I looked up Micheal Ellis, whom Chestnut mentioned as exemplary.

He no longer works as a barrister. However, he does hold shares in two companies. The register doesn't say how much he earns from the shares.

I'm not disputing that Mr Ellis is a good MP and not suggesting he's doing anything wrong, but the point is that he could be drawing a significant income from those shares, without actually working. Any MP with a small business could do the same.

I think any legislation would need to be more complex than just banning paid work. I don't think it's as easy as people think. A number of MPs own property, which presumably wouldn't count as "work". Boris Johnson gets paid royalties for work already written before he became an MP, which couldn't be stopped either. That would work well for any pop star or writer who wants to be an MP.

Something does need doing, but I'm not an accountancy/finance expert, so I'm not quite sure what. Like some others, I think the salary should increase (the metro mayors get paid more), but there need to be some restrictions on outside income. Maybe there should also be league tables of performance, based on number of votes cast, constituency surgeries, etc., as there are for schools and hospital trusts.

How about if they could work a certain number of hours, 'to keep their hand in' but had to donate the money they earned to charity? And pay all MPs a better wage. £80,000 might seem a lot, but it isn't that much for the responsibility they have.

Also no donations in cash or kind higher than a fixed sum; the same sum for all MPs at all levels.

Goodness, wouldn't some of them squeal...

Some MPs continue to work shifts as doctors and nurses.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51975661

I don't think it's a bad thing if MPs have the time to keep in touch with their roots. Caroline Lucas is probably exceptional because she's the only Green MP and just about the only Green politician with national standing.

However, maybe the number of hours spent on outside work should be limited and the work itself should be very strictly regulated. If MPs are found to be breaking the rules, there should be serious sanctions.

Even if they were stopped from working, there are ways they can earn money - dodgy or otherwise - by nominating somebody else to be paid (in theory). I don't see how MPs could be stopped from earning money by dealing in shares or property etc., which have just as much potential for fraud.

This is the REGISTER OF MEMBERS’ FINANCIAL INTERESTS as at 1 November 2021:

publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmregmem/211101/211101.pdf

No. of course they shouldn't. its a conflict of interest and they should be working only for their constituents

You know when you misread something?
With my mind on Covid boosters and this mornings flu jab , I misread that as “Should MP’s have another jab “
And my first thought was, sadly there’s no vaccine against sleaze, selfishness and hypocrisy.

I think it would be difficult to monitor. For example, what would there be to stop an MP owning property to rent in a spouse's name?

Rather than trying to undermine the parliamentary watchdog, I think the role need strengthening.

ayse

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.

So in other words, if youre not well off you can get paid. If you have a fraction over the means test you have to work for free.
Well I’ve heard it all now.

No they shouldn't have another income. If Michael Ellis can do it they all can. Click on the image. He ranks 1st out of all 650 MPs for responding to constituents' e-mails. He doesn't waste money and he hasn't got another job. Oh yes, and he's Conservative. The other MPs should take note.

On the other hand, some local Councillors often have full time jobs.
My son is one and he earns substantially more in total than an MP.
Some MP's are on local councils as well.

They often ‘ employ’ wives, family members etc too which keeps the extra expenses in the family.

We should pay them more. They shouldn’t be allowed to have other paid work. Head teachers, GP’s earn more than MPs

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

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.

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.

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?

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

X post MissA

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.

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

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.

No outside job, and of course no illegal lobbying.

I totally believe Caroline Lucas and hours.

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