You may link to my blog but if you want to copy my article to your own blog, please give the following credit: From "Ampers' Rants" at Thank you.

Fill in a one question questionnaire - it only asks how you arrived at my blog. Thank you. Just click on this link.

If you like what you see, why not subscribe to the blog? You can follow Ampers' Rants by adding your email address in the box below (right) Notifications are also shown in my Twitter account: @AmpersUK.

Monday, 11 August 2014

Proposed changes to the salary structure of Members of Parliament in the UK

Members of Parliament proposed changes to salary.

Some say MPs earn too much, others say too little. Perhaps it is a little of both.

I have an idea of a simple salary structure which might appeal to both sides of the divide.

First term of five years.

We presently pay a salary oFurther termsf £67,060 for a backbencher at the present. I propose we raise this to £100,000 but no longer pay for second homes, subsidised meal and food purchases.

But to get high flyers I also propose the following.

If a future MP has been earning at least £150,000 a year for at least twelve consecutive months in commerce, we pay him £150,000 a year during his first term.

I also want to do something about weeding out those who don't make the step onto the ministerial ladder. And there are many in parliament who have served three or more terms who haven't made it.

Further terms

An MP would suffer a salary drop of 50% in his second five year term in Parliament. Many who don't see a possible position opening up in their second term will seriously consider whether they like the life enough to stay on.

They would suffer a further salary drop as a backbencher for their third term. This means their salary would only be £25,000 a year. And a further 50% reduction for each term thereafter.

The 50% drop would, of course, also apply to the high fliers. Five years is long enough to find your feet and leave your mark.

I'm not sure how many people are on the ministerial ladder now, but after the 2005 General Election, there were 89 ministers and 51 parliamentary private secretaries in the Commons. There would therefore be 140 members who would not be subject to the 50% rule unless they lose their position of being on the ladder. Demotions as long as they were still on the ladder wouldn't cause any loss of salary.

My objective here is to weed out those who are not contributing enough to government, and those who are in it solely as a sinecure for life.

House of Lords

Not a lot we can do here, other than wire up the benches so we can give a small power jolt when they fall asleep! Or a bigger one when they reach 80!

But we could change the name of the second chambers to the “House of Elders”.

And instead of calling them “Lord Smith”, call them “Elder Smith” etc. Then a Lord would only be a hereditary Lord. We would then all know who was who and what was what.

Or do you have a better idea.


No comments: