IPSA - Right or Wrong?

[cloud]

The timing was never going to be good - better to make the change sooner rather than later.

Most people have no idea what MPs actually do - well, some MPs do more than others and that is half the problem. They don't have a job description or any form of monitoring or regulation.

But a good MP will be able to network well, come across as credible when negotiating on behalf of their constituents, and be convincing in Parliament - skills that you would usually have learned over the course of a career, so these people would probably be on a comparable wage if working elsewhere. The crappy disorganised MPs - and I could name a few - won't get re-elected. All the more reason for some kind of a job spec.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

But a good MP will be able to network well, come across as credible when negotiating on behalf of their constituents, and be convincing in Parliament.

But these are hardly rare and exceptional skills are they?

 

[somerset]

So please, don't start equating earnings or pensionable income with attitude or ambition, because, quite simply, that's horseshit.

Horseshit or not, my point was that I value the fact that I get a FSP, new entrants in my private sector corporation get MP schemes....the contradiction in having MP's voting for public sector changes to the gravy train that was civil servant gilt edged non contributory pension schemes, vs them also organising their own pension requirements, is I agree, strange, ....but put it in context, ©five million PS pensions to fund,.vs..650 active and approx 4500 active pensioners......its all unpalatable, but in this specific debate, its a question of scale and context.

 

[Seasidesage]

MP's should get the going rate, I have no problem with that. What I have an issue with is second jobs that conflict with their main one, fiddling expenses, cash for questions, lobbyists, all expenses paid trips for no purpose,backhanders and all the other dishonest things that clearly go on...