In all honesty i think I probably believe this.
Last Night I cheekily retweeted this :-
"Why don't we make MP's pay regional if the govt starting to talk about it for everything else? "
( origin Shiv Malik @shivmalik1)
I strongly believe that our representatives should be :-
- The brightest we can find !
- The best educated academically and real world battle hardened.
- Paid enough, to attract talent !
- Actually represent us ! Not the political party they belong too !
The MP's expenses scandal ( and it was a scandal ) would probably have been avoid if the remuneration system for MPs had/and did operate like a commercial organisation.
Why cannot an MP's private office operate like a limited company ? New MP takes over as MD and operates " the business ".
Similarly, for accommodation, company lets are done everyday for staff and contractors moving around the country. Why is it so complicated ?
But back to salary. many MP's claim to have taken a pay cut to become an MP and some use this as positive selling point. Why ?
The " public service , make a difference " answer is often trotted out ( and valid, in some cases only ) but its possible to make positive changes to people lives being a doctor, social worker, teacher etc so why be an MP ?.
Michael Portillo has stated that he became an MP to exercise power as a minister and eventually being a constituency MP didn't cut for him.
MP's should be ambitious powerhouse's who never take the path of least resistance.
With the current mess we need the best and if that takes an attractive salary so be it ! Some direct link to performance ( although i have no idea how ? ) would be good.
As to whether MP's pay is regional ? if its good enough for other areas of public sector pay then I would love to hear a reasoned argument as to why MP's should be different ?