MPs pay

Regular readers will know that I couldn't let this topic pass, without commenting.

The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) has recommended that members of the UK parliament should receive salary increases equaling 11%.  At the same time, there would be cuts in allowances and changes to pension rights which, say IPSA, would make the overall impact a net zero cost.

I am quite okay with those proposed changes to allowances.  In my view they are already too high, so this little bit of pruning won't go amiss.  They are also largely tax-exempt - even in the socialist paradise that is today's Britain, some are more equal than others.

Similarly, the pension changes are merely 'tinkering' which bring the golden pensions that MPs currently enjoy, just the tiniest bit closer to those which other public sector workers have.  Note the comparison - public sector workers!  Not the poor benighted souls in the private sector.  They continue to have pensions that are far inferior to those of the cosseted civil servants, which they nevertheless, fund!

Maybe you disagree that MPs enjoy good benefits?  After all, why would so many of them be forced to 'fiddle' and cheat on their expenses if they were so generous?  I say fiddle and cheat because I have decided to mince my words and refrain from calling the activities lying and stealing, though that is what the courts in a few 'show trials' seem to have decided.

Consider this though, how many businesses could fund an 11% increase in base pay by cutting back on other benefits, without those 'benefits' already being way too high in the first place?

Ed Miliband, from the socialist Labour Welfare Party, remains true to form.  Being of the socialist frame of mind he cannot resist a free ride.  So when the 'this is outrageous' bandwagon rolls along he has to jump on it.  He has written to the UK Prime Minister requesting that all party leaders meet with IPSA and get the recommendation reversed.  My admiration for his ability to posture, while on a rolling bandwagon, is tempered by the biliousness his opportunistic hypocrisy, generates.

Let's think about this.  Miliband already knows that the UK PM, David Cameron opposes the increase - though I suppose there is no point in jumping on a bandwagon and not letting the whole world know by publishing a letter - but Miliband also knows that IPSA are trying to  establish a process for determining suitable levels of pay for MPs and that implementing such a process is always likely to result in one-off anomalies.  Don't get me wrong, I do not support the increase but neither do I support the hypocrisy that pretends that developing a systematic and transparent approach to the issue is somehow wrong.  I have posted here before on why I think MP pay should be lower and linked to a multiple of the UK National Average wage - one sure way to get MPs focused on improving the 'lot' of all the people.

Here is my suggestion.  The IPSA proposals would not take effect until 2015.  Let's assume that this means, after the May 2015 General Election.   Why don't we have all candidates for election in 2015, publicly declare in their election material,  whether they would accept the increase or if they would refuse it.  If the increase has to be awarded, for practical purposes, then they would commit to donating the increase towards the reduction in the National Debt.  Since they are so adept at increasing this National Debt, their contribution would be a welcome step, for once, in the right direction.

This would avoid a pointless fight between party leaders and IPSA and would give voters a chance to see if their candidate is really with them and recognizes what 'we're all in this together' really means.





 

The dark side of Labour and Parliament.

UK politicians are generally held in low esteem by the public.  It takes a lot to dislodge Estate Agents and Lawyers from the title but MPs and councilors are now competing against tabloid journalists for the dubious title of least trusted 'professions' .

Even with issues like Plebgate, the police are still viewed more favourably than politicians.  Imagine, the police stitch-up a senior member of the coalition-leading Conservative party and yet they are still considered to be 'better' than politicians!

The latest revelations to surface relate to the Labour party and concern the recently former chairman of the Cooperative Bank and his affinity with drugs and seemingly 'having inappropriate gay porn images on his council provided computer'. 

The Labour party has surpassed itself in the way it is trying to distance itself from Paul Flowers, the Methodist minister that they allowed to be appointed as chairman of the Cooperative Bank.  When Flowers was appointed, he was somehow found to be a 'fit and proper person' despite being previously convicted for drink driving and gross indecency.     This is the same bank that developed a £1.5billion hole in its balance sheet, under Flowers' watch, following the acquisition of the Britania Building Society.  The same bank and organization that, like the unions, provides funding to the Labour party (any connection, one wonders).  In the case of the Cooperative Group this includes funding, via direct payments to the tune of at least £50,000, the office of Ed Balls, the Labour Shadow Chancellor and, through providing a significant overdraft of £3.9 million to the party at what are reportedly 'unusually generous terms'.

Given all that Labour has received from the Co-op, you would maybe expect a bit of loyalty but no.  Damage limitation is the name of the game and so Paul Flowers and the Co-op are thrown to the wolves.  The Cooperative Bank has now been rescued by the darlings of the left, the hedge funds!

In typical Labour fashion, they claim that any inference that they closed their eyes to Flowers' appointment is a smear tactic used by political opponents.  This is the same tactic that is used by all so called 'progressives' whenever their policies or actions are questioned.  Want to talk about immigration?  You must be a racist!  Did you mention homosexuality?  You are a homophobe!  One can never question the integrity of a Labour politician because they are, 'well you know a straight kind of guy' party.

Make no mistake, just as with the scandal at Falkirk, where the Unite union (Labour's biggest financial backer) tried to pack the selection process with union paid members, this Co-op scandal will further stain the Labour party.

However, the Labour party led by Ed Miliband (one of whose 'business advisors was the same Paul Flowers!) are not alone in dragging politics into the gutter (or a place lower than the gutter (House of Commons?)).

 We have also heard, in recent weeks of Nadhim Zahawi MP, of the Conservative party,  who claimed £5,882 for energy bills, seemingly to, in part, heat his stables.

We have Dennis McShane, former Labour minister, who has admitted expenses fraud.

Chris Huhne the darling of the left in the Liberal party and proponent of crackpot 'green policies' was jailed earlier this year for perverting the course of justice.

The list goes on and on.

There are some honest politicians with integrity - lest I be accused of anti-Labour bias, Dennis Skinner and Frank Field immediately spring to mind - but one gets the distinct impression that they are in the minority.  That is likely not fair but that is the impression.  Time and again we have stories where it is apparent that for many MPs, the sole purpose of being in parliament, is to milk the system for all you can, and in some cases, for a bit more, if you can get away with it.

I can't think of a stronger word than venal but I'm open to non-foul-mouthed suggestions!

So I have had a rant but honestly can't think how the position can be changed.  Ed Miliband and Labour are so dependent upon vested interest funding from the unions that, even if they wanted to clean house, they simply couldn't.  The Lib Dems must be treated with suspicion because their solution would lead to state funding of political parties.  The Conservatives?  Many Conservatives, from David Cameron on down, seem to just think that being in government is it.  Policies and integrity, who needs them, we have 'red boxes'!

What a sorry state in which we find British politics!