Keir Starmer Six Milestones speech and paper

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

If the country is in such a financial mess that WFA is withdrawn from pensioners, surely MPs should lead by example and forego theirs too?

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If the country is in such a financial mess that WFA is withdrawn from pensioners, surely MPs should lead by example and forego theirs too?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

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If the country is in such a financial mess that WFA is withdrawn from pensioners, surely MPs should lead by example and forego theirs too?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

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.

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.

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If the country is in such a financial mess that WFA is withdrawn from pensioners, surely MPs should lead by example and forego theirs too?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

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If the country is in such a financial mess that WFA is withdrawn from pensioners, surely MPs should lead by example and forego theirs too?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

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.

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...

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

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

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?

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.

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

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.

Above- correction "they are not supposed to lobby"

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

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

I don't know about a lot the other targets but I do know a bit about building residential properties, I ran a building site back in the 1990s. I worked on Green Field sites and Brown Field sites so have some insight into whats required to hit targets.

Thankfully I got out and retrained and even though it's a long time ago the basics never leave us oldies .

Also DD2 is currently working in a delivery team of a very large government construction project so we have conversations about the current state of the construction industry.

I can not see anyway the government, local or national, can achieve the target.

I'm not a nay sayer just some one who has rational questions about the targets.

This is what would be required to build 1.500000 homes in 1,800 and 25 days (5yrs).

The construction industry would need to build 822 homes a day .

That's 34 homes an hours.

34 homes an hour working 24/7 365.

So by today, 7th Dec, 127,296 homes needed to be completed to stand any chance of hitting the target.

To date, 7th Dec, no additional homes have been built, only those homes that were already in the process have been completed.

It's not going to happen.

I'm not downing Labour, it wouldn't matter if it was The Monster Raving Loony Party putting this target out. It's not going to happen.

It's not an achievable target. So I do wonder about the other targets.

Due to DD2 daily contact with Balfour Betty, Costain, BAM, Laing and other big construction companies I am aware they all have the same difficulty now.

Supplies, shortages.

Shortages of raw material, lack of capacity in the manufacturing sector and the big supply difficulty, workers. Workers who are suitably qualified and/or experienced.

So how will the construction industry find the additional workers and materials let alone the land to build the 1.500000 additional homes?

I'm not questioning the need for addressing the situation re the Police, NHS, Housing and so on, I do just wonder where the workers, the money, and the materials are going to come from to delver on what the PM has said.

So call me a nay sayer, call me FRight (Far Right) if you wish although I have no particular political leanings. However, using the real - not media - information and experience I question the wish list of any politician of any party.

I wait i hope of better times to come.

I think this gov't has done a good job so far, we have no more drs or medics strikes, kids are going to get breakfast soon & railways are going to be nationalised so no shareholders get huge profits for a rubbish service, lets hope water companies are next.
I'm quite happy to loose my WFA, I don't need it but I think they should have stopped it at those paying higher rate tax.
I also agree with the farmers & inheritance tax introduction, round here many rich people buy land with no intention of farming it but leaving it to there kids tax free. One wealthy person paid his farm staff to go to London & protest.
Clarkson shows that, only he has made an income filming his efforts to farm.
They're only paying half inheritance tax and have 10 yrs to pay it. I would love to buy land to farm it but I just can't afford it, maybe prices will come down now so ordinary folk can have a go.

👏👏

Good practical questions up there, allsortsofbags. definitely a wait and see "how".

I read that the 13000 police officers are not extra officers, they are regular police officers taken off their normal duties. Would this not leave their forces even more short of officers to investigate more serious crimes.

Foxyferret

I read that the 13000 police officers are not extra officers, they are regular police officers taken off their normal duties. Would this not leave their forces even more short of officers to investigate more serious crimes.

Could you reference where you read this please?

Not accurate even according to the DM. We need a source that supports that claim.