MPs empolying Family members.

[Leekbrookgull]

Are they saving public money by working from home? If the job was advertised, would the MP have to rent an office, provide equipment etc?

They already have thier own office and staff.

 

[Leekbrookgull]

So this is the end of Steptoe and Son, to be replaced with Steptoe and employee because someone thinks employing a family member is a racket.

I have no problems with the arrangements

But YOU CANT APPLY FOR THE POST.

 

[Leekbrookgull]

Thank-You.

 

[Steve in Japan]

the logic is that it makes no sense to squader half your budget on someone ineffective at a job, even if its your partner. if they had unlimited budget i would view it differently. if theres a story about partners (or friends etc, not covered) overpaid for what they do, lets hear about it.

Sorry, I've read that a few times and I don't understand the point you're making. One last time, if you are spending taxpayers money then you need to be able to explain how and why you have spent it, and why it's reasonable. There is no implied approval to hire family members once elected.

The fact the 1 in 5 MP'S are doing it doesn't make it right. (See the expenses scandal)

 

[clapham_gull]

the incentive is they have small budget, £85k i recall, to run their office, and need some sort of efficiency. there's little incentive to employ a partner to do nothing, thats a chunk of allowance you cant use productively. its not really news, this list is published every year. if we want to shine a light on MP funding, we should look at the setup around second homes, where theres far more scope to make a substantial nest egg.



honestly, who would be better as a PA than a partner? we're talking office admin, bit of secreterial work, keeping a diary and minor project managment. its not something that requires qualifications. performance reviews so they attain promotion and career progression to... what exactly, senior MP PA?

I wonder sometimes if you just play devil's advocate or struggle with attacking the status quo.

1 in 5 ? That's all I need to know. In any other part of the public sector the Tories would be screaming.

Having experienced even the "commercialised" public sector, professionally there are those who talk the talk, but personally you fall back on whatever there is to grab.

Nothing more than a restrictive practice. Can't get a job on the docks unless your grandfather did ? Applies to Parliament too across all parties.

Look how many high profile Labour MPs were high profile members of the Student Union.

It stinks and like many others I gave up seriously voting years ago. Apathy ? Nope - I wouldn't be posting if I didn't care.

This one is really really easy to fix, YOU CAN'T EMPLOY A FAMILY MEMBER. Sorry. If you want to... get another job.

 

[clapham_gull]

Being an MPs secretary is a horrible job; and not one you can realistically hire someone from the general public for if you want to hit the ground running - you need someone who worked on your campaign. If that's a family member, so be it.

If you're trying to feather your nest, employing your spouse/partner is a terrible idea as if you lose your seat both your income sources are gone.

There are lots of horrible jobs.

You can't hire someone from the general public ? Advertise the jobs and see who many applies.

Pool the PAs and make them sign the official secrets act of need be. How on earth does the Civil Service perform ?

Of course MPs can lose their seat - but you can offset that for 5 years by making sure more money comes in to your family over the term.

How on Earth can you defend that ? Are you saying we effectively vote for familes and not individuals ?

 

[Pavilionaire]

This RACKET and there are no other words for it has to stop. Just go mainstream media. This is not about money for me its about being on the level. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...s-a-family-member-the-full-list-revealed.html

If you need labour and want someone you can trust who will put in the hours and won't go blabbing to the press, is motivated to do well and won't leave you in the lurch then it makes perfect sense to employ members of your own family, I have no problem with this.

 

[Bozza]

I imagine there are a fair few of NSC's self-employed/contractors/small business men/women who "employ" their partner. Unlike the MPs, in most cases the partner of these business owners often does no actual work at all, they are merely on the books to get money out of the business in a tax efficient manner.

Can we moan about these people first?

 

[clapham_gull]

I imagine there are a fair few of NSC's self-employed/contractors/small business men/women who "employ" their partner. Unlike the MPs, in most cases the partner of these business owners often does no actual work at all, they are merely on the books to get money out of the business in a tax efficient manner.

Can we moan about these people first?

No, because MPs aren't the self employed who start their own business. Your right wing friends are more than happy to attack restrictive practices defended by the Unions but quite happy to defend their own.

You are either a capitalist who embraces the market philosophy or a jobs for the boys (and girls) man.

There are many examples of MPs family members whose "research" activity are questionable as work.

Simply ban it. The spouses will just have to "get on their bike" in the traditional Tory way.

 

[beorhthelm]

This one is really really easy to fix, YOU CAN'T EMPLOY A FAMILY MEMBER.

its not devils advocate, not the status quo, im just comfortable that some MPs see their partner of family as suited to working in their office. like in any other businesses. its suggested this is unfair, inappropriate, when its quite ordinary. how far removed do we want the MP staff to be, maybe ban anyone from the constituency?

just so we're clear, do you want "cant employ a family member" to all other employment? and friends, long term contacts etc. or are we saying we want different rules for MPs. because i thought we didnt want that, or is it something to apply when it suits our sense of outrage. as i say, if there is a story about unsuited or overpaid staff that are family, lets hear about it, as it is this is an annual rite.

 

[Bozza]

No, because MPs aren't the self employed who start their own business. Your right wing friends are more than happy to attack restrictive practices defended by the Unions but quite happy to defend their own.

You are either a capitalist who embraces the market philosophy or a jobs for the boys (and girls) man.

There are many examples of MPs family members whose "research" activity are questionable as work.

Simply ban it. The spouses will just have to "get on their bike" in the traditional Tory way.

Thanks for that. No, really...

I've not clicked on the original link - are you saying it is only Conservative MPs that employ family members, and Labour MPs do not do this?

 

[clapham_gull]

If you need labour and want someone you can trust who will put in the hours and won't go blabbing to the press, is motivated to do well and won't leave you in the lurch then it makes perfect sense to employ members of your own family, I have no problem with this.

In a sense I agree. Problem is, I can't trust members of Parliament not to take advantage. They have history.

Probably pay them more. That's the solution and take away the incentive to bump up their pay (in (whichever way they can) to what they individually think they should earn.

That is really the problem isn't it ? Society in this country has very slowly moved away from defining someone by "class" to what they earn. Unfortunately MPs move in such circles and get somewhat bitter. Further (unfortunately) a system has evolved where they have it both ways. Started with Thatcher who believed that increasingly their pay was "politically toxic" but turned a blind eye to simply allowing it elsewhere.

 

[clapham_gull]

Thanks for that. No, really...

I've not clicked on the original link - are you saying it is only Conservative MPs that employ family members, and Labour MPs do not do this?

Nope I've stated it's across the board. I just find the Conservative defence highly hypocritical. Big Government is apparently evil unless it includes your family.

Simply working the system at the Tax Payers expense.

Two Tory back bench MPs are apparently paying their wives £50,000 a year. You've honestly got to ask yourselves why others aren't.

I have far less problem with the self employed and the risks they personally take. As for the waged (and the absolute guarentee of a job for five years - Jesus Imagine !) - if they worked in the private sector they'd be out the door for fiddling their expenses.

 

[drew]

If you need labour and want someone you can trust who will put in the hours and won't go blabbing to the press, is motivated to do well and won't leave you in the lurch then it makes perfect sense to employ members of your own family, I have no problem with this.

You're right, if there is anyone you are going to trust it must be your spouse. I was only talking the other day to Chris Hulme about this very subject...........

 

[Leekbrookgull]

£45.000 a year. What is the dispute ? unelected,no job advert Your Money.

 

[Leekbrookgull]

Our Money.

 

[Albumen]

Empolying is for loosers.

Drunk post, or just really bad spelling?

As is spelling it would seem

Oh come on.

I see what you've done there.

Finally.

 

[Cian]

You can't hire someone from the general public ? Advertise the jobs and see who many applies.

You can't hire someone who is going to be effective immediately (which is what you need). It'll take them years realistically to get up to speed even with what you've done locally - unless you're a parachute candidate in to a safe seat.

You can hire someone who is going to reduce your effectiveness, piss off your constituents by not knowing what they're doing, etc; but that's about it. Remember that the secretary actually does most of the mind-numbing constituency work that a lot of people seem to believe is the sole purpose of an MP.

Pool the PAs and make them sign the official secrets act of need be.

Not much use coming up to an election when 649 of them need their PA available to them basically 24/7

Of course MPs can lose their seat - but you can offset that for 5 years by making sure more money comes in to your family over the term.

Doesn't realistically fix the problem. If you're hiring a famly member as your secretary to feather your nest, you're an idiot.

How on Earth can you defend that ? Are you saying we effectively vote for familes and not individuals ?

By writing what I've written, that's how. You don't agree with it, but that doesn't mean its not a defense.

An outright ban on hiring family members will just result in it being someone else close to them in the party - the jobs are never going to be publicly advertised; except possibly by a populist opposition or abstentionist MP looking for good PR. Although Sinn Fein hire family members as a matter of course too, despite loving screaming from the sidelines about that sort of thing.