Should MPs be able to have another job?

ayse

Lincslass

Many benefits for the poorest in society are means tested so why not MPs pay? After all, they make the regulations so why should they not be subject to similar regulation?

Sorry but running the country and having means tested pay is laughable and ridiculous. Let’s means test pay for hospital managers, Drs.then!! Company directors, and charity Directors, now that is one I would vote for.

When you were little, did anybody tell you two wrongs don't make a right?

And what about Ian Blackford, the SNP’s leader in Westminster? He had five different external jobs in 2017! Apparently he did, until recently earn £3,247 a month for 8 hours work per quarter as chairman of the Golden Charter Trust?

They are all at it.

Keith Vaz? I’m not even going there.

Nadine Dorries employed her daughters Phillipa and Jennifer to work as secretaries in her private office in 2012, Both daughters were paid from public funds at a cost to the taxpayer of up to £80,000. As the current head of arts and culture one of her manifesto changes is nepotism in the BBC, you can’t make it up!

Networking ensures that MPs and others moving in influential circles will never be short of generous offers of well paid opportunities.

Once MP's leave the Houses of Parliament they are often be approached by large Companies to be on their Board of Chairmen. Speaking engagements etc.

I've got a beady eye on Sir John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings) ((No, I don't live there)).
£30,000 per annum from a company called HBSA, providing technical and vocational education.
£50,000 per annum from BB Energy - Companies House says "wholesale of petroleum and petroleum products" - employed as Strategic Advisor.
£38,000 per annum from the University of Bolton as part time (20-30 hours per month) Professor of Political Studies.

Employs his wife as his office manager.

No, they shouldn't have another job.
There is no reason why a doctor or nurse cannot keep their hand in voluntarily and absence from other professions could also need re-training to get up to date.

I do believe her - she is an exemplary example of how they all should be.

Apparently they’re so hard up and badly paid that they need to have at least one other job,

Germanshepherdsmum

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.

They are reimbursed for salaries for staff. there were some scandals a few years ago because not only were MPs paying their wives for secretarial work but also their children. Some wives do actually work for their husbands but not all.

I don't quite understand your comment about David Amess. He was attracted by the "low" salary ( his wife worked for him part time as a caseworker ) so why shouldn't other decent hardworking people be attracted by it too? There are some people who go into politics for the general good.

Absolutely should not have another job. If they have time to have another one then they are not doing their job as an MP properly. If they want to be a doctor then be a doctor, not an MP.

There are also some amazing people out there who would be fantastic MPs who would not require a substantial increase because their average salary is a fraction of that of serving MPs.
Those people would also have more idea of how most people live their lives. Most wealthy people mix with other wealthy people all in their own little bubbles. They spend their time comparing their income with others higher up the ladder but never consider the majority which in this country earn about £25,000,
£83,000 plus generous expenses seems a small fortune to most,

I can think of at least one MP who is also a doctor, and another who lost at the last election, who was a nurse. If they didn’t ‘keep their hand in and their qualifications up to date’, they wouldn’t be much use in their former occupation if they lost their seat.

There are some amazing people out there who would be fantastic as a MP but would have to take a substantial pay cut.

PS.

The decision of the committee doesn't rest on the decision of one person. Recommendations are made to the Parliamentary Standards Committee by the Commissioner. Currently, the Committee has 7 MP members: 4 Conservatives, 2 Labour and 1 SNP. The rest are lay people.

Decisions on suspension go to Parliament. Currently, the Conservatives have a massive majority, so there is an appeal system built into the system. Currently, it's weighted towards Conservative members. Paterson (and others) was given many opportunities to state his case. Have you actually read the report? A formal appeal would require fresh evidence, which he doesn't appear to have.

eazybee Ownership of property, shares, etc does have to be declared but not the income derived from such sources.

It would be quite easy for a prospective MP who owns a company to transfer the "work" of running the company to somebody else (so he/she wouldn't have a job) but then to draw dividends from the company and still have a controlling interest in how the company is run. I believe Grant Shapps did this. There would still be potential for lobbying on behalf of the company and government deals which would benefit the company.

The question was 'should MPs be able to have another job?' not an investigation into other income, from investments, royalties, property etc which I believe has to be declared.

Lobbying was not regarded initially as another job, it was engaging an MP to represent particular interests when the need arose, for which a retainer fee was paid.

Clearly companies paying £100,000 a year expect a great deal more for their money, and this is truly shocking. Since the Parliamentary debacle about the judgement more information has been revealed and Owen Paterson deserves his fate. This committee does need to be reformed and be transparent in its judgement which appears to rest on the decision of one person, and allowing an appeal would clarify to all the reasons for that judgement.
I do not believe MPs should be banned from working in their own career field, as they may need to return to it if they leave Parliament, and be conversant with all developments. But working should be restricted to a set number of hours, in any capacity, to ensure they are available to function efficiently as an MP.

Dickens Well, he's 65 now, so not long before he's eligible to pick cabbages and potatoes! It was even suggested that pensioners should be paid below the minimum wage because they're slow. I believe he's given up his two extra jobs now, although his MP pension will be more than the average wage.

Franbern What would you do about those with inherited wealth who invest it in shares or property etc and draw an oncome from that?

Historically, it was because only people with inherited wealth could be MPs that they were paid.

I think there's more than on issue here.

1 Does an MP have time to do other work? Some of them work unpaid for charities - is that OK. Such work does, after all take time away from constituency work.

2 Should they paid at the same level as other people with similar responsibilities, eg CEOs of large companies, some doctors and lawyers, local government heads, etc etc. If they're not, how will the most able be tempted to become MPs?

3 If people object to their extra income, should paid and unpaid income be treated the same? ie they shouldn't have any.

4 What about royalties for previously written books/articles?

5 What kind of regulation needs to be put in place, so that MPs don't get "bribed" by those with cash (or holiday houses) to spare?

I'm sure there are other issues, but I just don't think it's as easy as saying they shouldn't have jobs.

... no, they should not have other jobs... unless it's fruit or cabbage picking in the windswept wilds of Lincolnshire (or wherever).

Owen Patterson thought it a good idea - an idea roundly condemned by his stunned ministerial colleagues at the time - for pensioners to fill the gaps left by departing East Europeans and pick the crops, but to exclude them from the minimum wage constraint so that farmers didn't lose money due to the fact that they would, naturally, be "slow" (he later denied that he'd said they should work below minimum wage).

Of course it was a ludicrous and silly idea and one that would never have 'flown', but it does indicate the mind-set of some of these ministers who always insist when caught out doing dodgy 'stuff' that they only ever wanted to 'serve their constituents / country / party'.... so - what better way to do it than patriotically donning their Hunter wellies and getting stuck in !

But I do respect those that continue to put in hours in the NHS in frontline services - from whichever party.

Those desperately poor MP's!!!
Only receiving (not always earning) £82,932 per year in salary and also able to claim large expenses for such things as travel, postage, communications (ie wifi, etc), second home, etc. etc. AND a large amount of severance pay when they either step down or do not get re-elected.
Also to take into account the number of days holidays they get each year 45 days during summer, plus easter and christmas etc.

A good constituency MP will, without doubt, work many hours - but few are good constituency MP's. Far too many regard it as cushy number and stepping stone on to many lucrative opportunities/

Of course they should ntot be permitted any other job or any consutlancies whilst in office. Goes without saying as far as I am concerned.

Would also suggest that the next time they ask for a salary incrrease - instead of getting any cash etc the country should have a minute put aside one evening to clap for them!!!

Lincslass

Many benefits for the poorest in society are means tested so why not MPs pay? After all, they make the regulations so why should they not be subject to similar regulation?

No, of course not.
How can they have the time to do so?

Absolutely not. I know a politician who says he would still have work outstanding if there were 3 of him working full time.

I am opposed to MPs having second jobs. However I do think that a GP MP doing half a day in a surgery, a dr in a hospital, a teacher doing half a day in school, a solicitor or barrister doing same would enhance the overall knowledge of HoC.
The rest could do community policing, social work, teaching assistant work or hands on work in a hospital. Working on buses and trains would be useful. Maybe then we'd feel MPs had contact with the general public at large, not just a few individuals.