Seven in ten MPs on £65k believe they are underpaid

[Sussex Nomad]

Certainly underpaid compared to most jobs of that level, though I would given them a rise and ban them from taking second paid jobs whilst they're elected.

Simple solution, simple conclusion... let's get a 20 man working committee to discuss it over the next three years!

 

[cloud]

The reason that MPs were allowed to claim for expenses in the first place, was that it was a cheaper alternative than simply increasing their salaries, and which would mean higher Tax, NI and pension contributions. Especially given that, at the time, most of them were on final salary pensions.

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

What a strange comparison to make. I was never aware that the ability to command a naval vessel was a requirement to become an MP and a minister. I thought it was more to do with policy ideas, articulate speech making and answering questions etc.

Well sending troops to war, or launching the UK's Nuclear deterrent, is possibly the most important decision a Prime Minister will ever have to take. My argument is that if you don't have combat experience, you'll never fully understand the kind of issues that you have to deal with when making that kind of decision.

If you are claiming that people who have reached the top level in the Civil Service aren't worthy of the salary they command then by all means go ahead, but these are the real experts (in their own field) in Government, NOT the Politicians. That's why they are appointed, to assist Politicians in their decision making, and implement those decisions once made. They provide the continuity that helps to stop bad ideas becoming bad policies and bad Government. In many cases they are only appointed for a fixed term, just as non-execs in the Private Sector would be, and are often recruited from the Private Sector as well.