Keir Starmer Six Milestones speech and paper

Worst PM ever.
Robs the dead
Robs the pensioners
Robs the students
Back track on whole manifesto
Going to build on farmland and green spaces
Robs parents paying for private education
Stopped fuel caps
Targeting sick and disabled to force them to work
Spending millions on hotels for illegal immigrants
No concrete policies - they change every few weeks
I will never vote Labour again as Starmer is not for working people, students and pensioners

Think I will reserve comments until 2029 to see if the ambitious plans come to fruition!!

Above- correction "they are not supposed to lobby"

petal53

Second jobs is something of a different issue. I’ve seen quite a few Gransnetters who have said on GN that they don’t believe MPs should have any second (paid) job. For me, the jury is out on that one. There are some jobs where it’s necessary to keep up skill levels ie doctor, and it must be desirable for MPs to give talks to groups of people, but surely only the payment of expenses should be the norm, not payment of a handsome fee.

Cash gifts to MPs should never be acceptable. Cash gifts can be given to the political party, and MPs should be able to claim necessary expenses from their party at election time. The example given by Wyllow of RJ being given £75,000 at election time makes the mind boggle. Just why?

Thanks for the advice Maizie but becoming an MP was never on my ‘to do’ list. I reserve the right to criticise what I see as unacceptable practices though. I have that right as a voter.

And I maintain that MPs are paid sufficiently well for them to pay their own heating costs.

Yes Petra I've always agreed about the outside jobs and the 'only the necessary keeping up qualifications".

There is currently no regulating body on gifts and "gifts by any other name" except that MP's have to declare more than £300. Thy are supposed to "Lobby" but some of the "directorships" and "paid engagements" look pretty close to that.
Being paid to bring your party political interest into the media at inflated sums looks very dodgy to me.

A good MP, after all, serves their constituents and takes part in the hard grind of parliamentary committees not just turning up to vote.

so in terms of "giving up" changes could be made on heating expenses by changing guidelines on expenses but it leaves a far greater number of "grey" areas untouched.

BTW, Have looked at a great number of "declared interests" for past threads. Many indeed most MP's don't get the "big money" at all.

Saying is one thing doing is another. I don't believe a word he says!

Second jobs is something of a different issue. I’ve seen quite a few Gransnetters who have said on GN that they don’t believe MPs should have any second (paid) job. For me, the jury is out on that one. There are some jobs where it’s necessary to keep up skill levels ie doctor, and it must be desirable for MPs to give talks to groups of people, but surely only the payment of expenses should be the norm, not payment of a handsome fee.

Cash gifts to MPs should never be acceptable. Cash gifts can be given to the political party, and MPs should be able to claim necessary expenses from their party at election time. The example given by Wyllow of RJ being given £75,000 at election time makes the mind boggle. Just why?

Thanks for the advice Maizie but becoming an MP was never on my ‘to do’ list. I reserve the right to criticise what I see as unacceptable practices though. I have that right as a voter.

And I maintain that MPs are paid sufficiently well for them to pay their own heating costs.

Doodledog

I agree that age shouldn’t be the driver for stopping payments (or starting benefits for that matter), PoliticsNerd. But why is it those who work who have to pay for everyone else? NI is only paid by workers, and most of it comes from those on PAYE. I’d like to see a fairer system of funding for all the things we take for granted.

That's an excellent point but I have no answer as to what that fairer system could be.

Do you know of any that have been suggested?

Looking at expenses and gifts/money earnt separately.

Petra you give a good list of essential expenses and I see no reason that heating couldn't be reviewed or limited in some way if the will is there from all MP's.

This would be a new move because in the past oversight has been on proper claiming/over claiming of expenses (remember the chap, name forget, who claimed for gardening expenses) and careless or inaccurate claims, but its do-able if the will is there from MP's and its translated into IPSOS guidelines.

Oversight and rules on both gifts and money earnt are much, much more complicated. Every MP has to declare both gifts in kind and earnings outside parliament. You can check any MP by googling their name and "Register of interests

Specifically named gifts in kind are easier to find and I agree they should be very limited, - they are easy to ID.

However .........gifts of quite substantial amounts in "cash" are declared and we dont know what for (although some are just before elections so one presumes election expenses). For example, Jenrick was given £75.000 by a sports company before the conservative election and it essentially never clear what for.

Then there are "Speaking engagements" counted as "work outside parliament" when someone is paid a couple of hundred is understandable, but sometimes they run into a few thousands and the classic example is where Farage was recently paid £40,000 to speak at a NOMAD conference.

" work outside parliament" also includes well paid directorships and of course sometimes regular very well paid media work.

So we have to ask, how do we regulate all these

MaizieD You raise an interesting point on legislation which is being passed through on the nod in this Parliament. Easy work for some?

I suggest, petal, that you put yourself forward to become an MP at the next GE and then you can have a go at righting all these wrongs...

After all, it's a well paid job for not a lot of work and loads of benefits... And it's not as if being responsible for voting for, modifying or removing the laws under which our nation functions is a particularly important thing to be doing...

I know why the ruling about MPs expenses was introduced.
MPs are paid appropriately £90,000 per year, which is more than many of them could hope to earn in their usual jobs. Expenses such as MPs office expenses are paid, quite rightly. Travel expenses, also absolutely. Heating expenses, no! Everyone else pays for their own heating. There is no reason at all why MPs cannot pay for their own heating. Nor is there any reason why the taxpayer should pay for MPs subsidised food, and even less for MPs subsidised bar expenses. None whatsoever.
And no, gifts are not expenses, but hey are very nice perks, not available to anyone else. Gifts are given for a reason, and the reason is not altruism. It should be illegal to bribe give gifts of any sort to MPs, simply because they are MPs, and illegal for MPs to accept them.

petal53

BevSec

If the country is in such a financial mess that WFA is withdrawn from pensioners, surely MPs should lead by example and forego theirs too?

Of course they should.
And maybe they should foregoing a few more of their perks. Gifts seem an obvious example. It should be a crime to give or accept a gift for politicians. It can be seen, quite rightly, as bribery.

'Gifts' have nothing at all to do with MPs expenses.

As posted before, the payment of expenses was implemented in order to make the opportunity to become an MP independent of the individual's wealth. Until then, the country was ruled by those wealthy enough to be able pay the additional costs incurred in being an MP out of their own money.

This reason is as valid now as it was in 1911.

Would you really want to be represented and ruled solely by wealthy people?

BevSec

If the country is in such a financial mess that WFA is withdrawn from pensioners, surely MPs should lead by example and forego theirs too?

Of course they should.
And maybe they should foregoing a few more of their perks. Gifts seem an obvious example. It should be a crime to give or accept a gift for politicians. It can be seen, quite rightly, as bribery.

Wyllow3

Wages and expenses have been paid since 1911 when it was recognised that only the rich could become MP's otherwise.

Just because something has been happening since 1911 doesn’t mean it should continue. In 1911 we still had the death penalty and abortion was illegal. Perhaps we should go back to the values of 1911! Or perhaps things should change.

Exactly Shinamae they should forgo their heating allowance to show that we are all in it together! But of course they never would.
WFA, heating allowance, a rose by any other name.

MaizieD

BevSec

If the country is in such a financial mess that WFA is withdrawn from pensioners, surely MPs should lead by example and forego theirs too?

They don't have a WFA to forgo.🫤

They do have a heating allowance..

BevSec

If the country is in such a financial mess that WFA is withdrawn from pensioners, surely MPs should lead by example and forego theirs too?

They don't have a WFA to forgo.🫤

If the country is in such a financial mess that WFA is withdrawn from pensioners, surely MPs should lead by example and forego theirs too?

Wages and expenses have been paid since 1911 when it was recognised that only the rich could become MP's otherwise.

And again the ^ it’s been going on for years^

Not sure what you mean?

Paying expenses to MP's is entirely reasonable per se and has been going on for years and years for the reasons laid out in Doodledogs' last couple of paragraphs.

One can disagree about levels, and amounts, and on previous discussions on here many have voiced their view it's time to look at those.

Doodledog

Only pensioners were entitled to it. Whatever MPs get is not the WFA, and is not claimed on bills accrued in their private homes.

This is from the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority:
MPs may claim utility costs for property registered with us. MPs who stay in rented accommodation can claim for running costs, including utility bills, subject to an overall budget cap. They cannot claim for bills for their private homes, or for things like mortgage payments.

The principle is that many MPs will need accommodation at a second location to carry out their parliamentary functions as an MP. MPs who need to travel to Westminster may claim for accommodation while they are in London, whether this is for renting a property or staying in an hotel (for which there is a cost cap). We believe this is fundamentally important for democracy: without sufficient funding, MPs would not be able to focus on the vital work of representing and supporting their constituents. There is also a risk that people without independent wealth or another source of income would be excluded from becoming MPs.

www.theipsa.org.uk/freedom-of-information/rfi-202208-12

How can anyone defend it!

They call it expenses when you’re an MP. And IPSA will tell you that the public is responsible for funding MPs.

Only pensioners were entitled to it. Whatever MPs get is not the WFA, and is not claimed on bills accrued in their private homes.

This is from the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority:
MPs may claim utility costs for property registered with us. MPs who stay in rented accommodation can claim for running costs, including utility bills, subject to an overall budget cap. They cannot claim for bills for their private homes, or for things like mortgage payments.

The principle is that many MPs will need accommodation at a second location to carry out their parliamentary functions as an MP. MPs who need to travel to Westminster may claim for accommodation while they are in London, whether this is for renting a property or staying in an hotel (for which there is a cost cap). We believe this is fundamentally important for democracy: without sufficient funding, MPs would not be able to focus on the vital work of representing and supporting their constituents. There is also a risk that people without independent wealth or another source of income would be excluded from becoming MPs.

www.theipsa.org.uk/freedom-of-information/rfi-202208-12

BevSec
WFA allowance withdrawn from OAP,s but not from MPs!
I don’t think they’re old enough or poor enough to get WFA.
They call it expenses when you’re an MP.