91热爆

If he wants more money, maybe Tory MP David Mclean should get himself a new job then.

I'd suggest a 1st tier officer in a district council....

Looks like they may just be starting to listen,

Lets see what happens on expenses.

Mega mega decisions.. most just follow the whip.

Can anybody be seriously surprised at this decision. They are held in such contempt that I think there would be the chance of an actual revolt by taxpayers.

On so many issues we actually have little or no choice as to what taxes we pay. PAYE is deducted at source. Tax on dividends is deducted at source. Our company pensions are taxed at source.

How much longer must we put-up with any government which holds us, the electorate in such contempt. We are told by the likes of Hazel Blears that we really should show
more respect to our parliamentarians. Well I'll tell you how they could regain my respect.

Get us out of Iraq. Get us out of Afghanistan. Do not build new aircraft carriers to keep the electorate happy. There must be a general election and soon. This situation must not be allowed to continue for another two years. The longer the delay the more serious will be the solution. Please call an end to this disgrace of a parliament.

The labour party candidate in Glasgow East must be defeated, David Davies must win, but most of all we must be given our, English, freedom. The break-up of the United Kingdom will happen soon and it is Blair and Brown who will be to blame. Put us all out of our misery. Give us an English parliament and get rid of all the 'foreigners'.

Their salary is irrelevant to them; they just boost their income via "office" expenses and various other perks (most of which aren't mentioned by the 91热爆, but you'll find them if you search google etc).

The fact that they vote-down a salary increase is just a diversion from their true income/perks.

Free foreign holiday every year complete with flight upgrades anyone? Just search the register of members' interests and you'll see them all there.

Given the current polls that put public opinion of politicians below that of estate agents and tax inspectors, it would have been hard for them to vote through a pay rise above inflation, which the public don't believe they deserve, all the more so given the treatment handed out to the police, which the public believe should have been honoured. To expect them to bite the bullet over expenses is probably a step too far though.

The only solution, and something which would go some small way to restoring their battered reputation, is for our politicans to lose the right to vote through their own pay, expense and pension arrangements. They should be set by a suitable formula. Of course, having seen what happened to the police who had just such an arrangement, they may not be too keen on that!

All that David McLean proves is that council officers are paid too much too.

Given the fact that 80% of UK laws are made in Europe these days, MP's are little kmore than district councilors, and should get no more. I believe most councillors are on allowances of under 拢10,000 a year.

Surely more and more mega mega decisions are now being made in Brussels therefore a pay cut should be on the cards coupled with a vast drop in expenses.

3 (TAG)

I agree with you about it being Brown and Blair who are very much the centre of blame for the threats of break up of the United Kingdom.

But I very much doubt it will happen, the United Kingdom has alot of potential, we can only hope that sometime in the future our government realise this and sort out all the issues that are damaging the union.

ps......I (and thousands of others in Northern Ireland) am very much a British citizen and far from a "foreigner"

er TAG, we need the new carriers,

unless you think we should stop having any millitary, and in that case, youre an idiot. If you do think we need a military then ignore the idiot bit.

The connotations concerning corridors are sinister in many cases.
Wasn't it the evil monster Grendel who crept along the corridors as the warriers feasted and enjoyed tales of ancient boasts?
There will be, I'm afraid much evil, boasting and pigging it along the corridors of the Houses of Commons, but very little valour.

"80% of British laws made in Brussels" is the sort of fact-free slogan I'm really bored of. So:

Parliament's independent research office says: "A frequently asked question concerns the amount of UK legislation arising from EC legislation. It is impossible to answer this question accurately for a number of reasons. UK laws implemented as a result of EC legislation might have been brought into UK law anyway and existing UK laws might adequately implement all or parts of an EC law"

And by way of a hard statistic the House of Commons Library reveals that in the 2004-5 session of Parliament, 9% of legislative instruments were made under the European Communities Act, most of which would have been minor amendments to things like trading standards regulations. I think most people can tell the difference between the EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (NAMES AND LABELLING OF TEXTILE PRODUCTS) (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS 2005 (to take a real example) and the Criminal Justice Act.

Well if they are allowed to carry on with their 20 squiddles a day allowance without receipts that will surely be what I will be claiming in my next tax return... 365 x 20 = 拢7300. 40% of that is 拢2920... a tidy little refund.

Of course they rejected the expenses reform, their know which side their bread is buttered.


If the public could actually easily see how much they paid them (i.e. say a flat salary with no other income), there'd be a revolution within a week.

Good. They took the right decision.

Assuming Gordon gets dumped at the next General Election surely 'Brave-Dave' Cameron is going to have to reform the way MP's work in the light of:

1. Impending break up of the UK. Can Dave rescue the UK? Can he answer the West Lothian question ? What is the role of an MP given regional parliaments?

2. Brussells runs more and more and Westminster less. Do we need so many MP's?

#3
"but most of all we must be given our, English, freedom"

Sorry, no one is "given" freedom, you win it by voting for it (and persuading others to do so as well).

In Scotland, we suffered from a "democratic deficit" for many years (Westminster couldn't make time for much legislation specifically attuned to our different legal system for example - and needed legal modernisation simply didn't happen). The current devolution system has transferred that deficit to England.

Most Scots (as opposed to Scots Labour MPs!) don't want to have any involvement in English affairs. We recognise that your choices are your affair.

There are at least 5 nationalities within the UK - English, Scottish, Welsh, Irish and British. While many will identify themselves with "dual nationality" (eg English and British"), they will have a primary allegiance to one or other poitical national identity. All have legitimate aspirations for what they identify as their "country".

Unfortunately, the aspirations of the "British", are in direct opposition to those of us with the other national identities - we can't both have what we want!

On the other hand, there is no conflict between the aspirations of the non-British nationalisms.

Oh course they were always going to reject the pay rise in favour of the big automatic hike in their expenses...expenses are not taxable!!

Those pigs will always be able to get their snouts into the trough, anyone who doubts that has not met any of them!

They're all disgusting, every single one of them.

Members of Parliament should have their salaries linked to the old age pension.

"And for that we're getting the level of pay of a 2nd tier officer in a district council"

Firstly, that says more about the bloated salaries at the revolving-door level of councils than it does about MPs.

Secondly, MPs, unlike the contract-wranglers and logo-primpers that now our councils, are there to represent the public in parliament. The 'life-and-death' decisions they collectively make should be based on what their constituents tell them, they certainly shouldn't be the dodgy punts in the hope of promotion that you'd expect from those in charge of peddling parks and bungling bins.

Although many MPs choose to behave like the bag-carrying hangers-on whose salaries they envy, that doesn't mean they deserve to be paid like them. If they think they could do better running a council, they're perfectly free to apply.

Second tier officers in districts councils are clearly overpaid. I wondered where we got such high average pay figures from. Overpaid, council chief executives, officials, civil servants and health service managers to name a few.

Re #14
These are two critical issues. But surely a victory for "Brave Dave" is more likely to lead to the break up of the union? The Scots dislike of Gordon Brown at the moment is nothing compared to their dislike of the Conservatives. Being the guinea pigs for the Poll Tax destroyed the Tories as a political force in Scotland for a generation.
As for the number of MP's given the vote on expenses tonight I guess the view that are too many MP's will become even more popular than it is now.
By nature I am a believer that most politicians want to perform a public service. Tonight's vote is a cause for huge disappointment.

20. newtactic

Oh good I wondered when we get on to fat cat pay

The top 300 bosses in the state sector saw their salaries increase 12.8% last year, boosting their pay to an average 拢237,564, according to a public sector 鈥渞ich list鈥�.

Seventeen earned more than 拢500,000 per year.

The report prepared by the TaxPayers鈥� Alliance, a pressure group trying to cut tax, undermines Brown鈥檚 pledge to keep pay rises for rank and file public sector workers within the government鈥檚 2% inflation target.

Mind you if youre try to promote national chip week your going to need a top man

Not that Im bitter or anything

Several thousand unnamed GPs meet the 拢150,000 of annual earnings to qualify for the list, as do many executives and broadcasters at the 91热爆.

The TaxPayers鈥� Alliance issues a separate rich list to cover largesse in local government.

The 10 highest paid on its list earn an average of 拢799,000, 40 times as much as the basic pay for a nurse or soldier.

Some value

I was honestly expecting that it would be Tory MP's that voted for the expenses hike, but incredibly, when they are already less popular than gas in a spacesuit, it was mainly labour MP's that voted for this disgusting tax-free pay hike. What do labour MPs know that they are not letting on about? Why are they doing their level best to lose the next election? Increasing tax on the poorest, and wasting the proceeds, selling us out to the EU and the imposition of a police state. Why?

MP's should realise that their job IS to make 'mega mega decisions', not that they do, they just do whatever there leaders tell them rather than what the constituents they are representing feel. They know what the job demands when they decide to run for MP, so to say "we are paid like second officers in the council" for their work just because they find it tough when they get there is pathetic. i don't set my own pay or claim to run my second home in my job, i dont even have a first home of my own. and then these people have the audacity to talk about the "credit crunch" and "difficult times". dont make me chuck. they are sat there claiming there wage they decided was enough, and claiming expenses for mortgages on 2 homes, and having a little debate on wether they should have more, while the people they exploit are struggling under the pressure of inflation, something the government does naf all about. If i had to go to London to work i would have to pay for my own accommodation. So should they. And if they dont want the job they should get out and let someone in who does, someone who is willing to do the job they set out to do for the wage they get without being so greedy on the back of the taxpayer.

It is now apparent that previous restraint by MPs in relation to salary increases was accompanied by a tacit understanding that "the expense rules are there to be utilised".

So - an overt restraint on salary accompanied by covert, stealthy income enhancement via expenses. The covers have now been pulled back on the expenses element hence the current dilemma.

In terms of job creation and income levels, the main beneficiaries of New Labour's period in office, relative to other segments, have been firms of management consultants and senior level employees in the public sector.

It would be unsurprising should MPs resent the money being spent on the former and envy the salary hikes enjoyed by the latter before the brakes were applied. Irritation levels probably not helped by the number of the individuals from the former who have slid into jobs in the latter.

So, David Maclean thinks MPs have "responsibility for making mega decisions".

Who is he trying to kid?

Most MPs are just lobby fodder who vote the way they are told by their party whips.

Very few MPs have the courage to oppose their party line on a matter of principle for fear of damaging their own promotion prospects.

MPs who bulldozed through the Lisbon Treaty and the 42 days should be particularly ashamed.

Frankly, many of our MPs could be easily replaced by trained monkeys.

Pay rises are taxable, even for MPs.
Expenses are not.

Which one will they vote to keep??
Go figure!!

It does not take much thought.

Sounds like second tier officers in local councils are well-overpaid then.

No surprises there, though, given some of the jobs one sees advertised in the Guardian these days...

Hm. Actually I thought about 5 of them actually make the mega mega decisions and the rest just go through whichever door the whips tell them to.

Since that would seem to need no qualifications whatsoever and the job continues to be at least four-times oversubscribed, I think the only logical conclusion is that they are vastly OVERpaid!

(Or looking at the first point, perhaps we should make 50% of their salary contingent on voting against their own party in a winning vote at least twice a year. Then we might actually see a little more independent thought amongst our representatives!)

"We have a responsibility for making mega mega decisions. And for that we're getting the level of pay of a 2nd tier officer in a district council."

Ha!

1. My MP has almost never deviated from his party's line, and has only done so on a tiny number of occasions, and on inconsequential subjects.

2. My MP can't even recognise a 'mega mega decision'. The Lisbon Treaty (the full speed ahead towards a single European state) isn't worth bothering with as far as he's concerned, and 42 day detention (giving up hard won and long standing rights to freedom) is of no concern to him.

3. Why are district councillors, who have less control over anything meaningful to the people that elect them, courtesy of greater central control, got such good pay and rations?

You guys are the pits.

Why would you reject input without even referring to a moderator?

What key words mesn that an input cannot
be acceptable?

Hate current politicians? Why not?

I hope that lot (MP's) are starting to get the message. Surely they now know that the years of plenty are at an end and rhey will no longer be getting away with the abuse of their priveledge. #24 I think the anwer to your question as to the strange behaviour of labour is that they might be resigned to the fact that they will be out of a job soon. With this in mind they have very little time left to keep srewing money out of the public purse .this vote will let them get more in a shorter time

The way this is going the public will soon be making a mega mega decision - and it could very well involve something a bit more unpleasant than a hair shirt.

#24 purpleDogzzz

"What do labour MPs know that they are not letting on about?"

They DO know. They are mostly out of a job at the next election and they know it, so they are now filling their boots as fast as they can. Watch out for some real eye-watering expense claims over the next 2 years.

As someone staying away from home 4 nights a week on a regular basis, I think I might try claiming by the same rules and see what our 'customer' friendly Inland Revenue has to say. Funnily enough, I think I already know the answer.

Four legs good. Two legs bad. B**

Having just watched Nick's piece on the news at 10 I was quite surprised.

Firstly that the expenses regime was allowed to stay as it is. Secondly because no less than 33 government ministers apparently voted for the status quo and lastly because, although I and others have concerns over David Cameron and his ability to govern, he can clearly be heard to say "Where is the Government?" as he sat somewhat stunned by the result of the vote in his seat.

Gordon Brown expressed some apparent concern at the result of the vote yet made no effort whatsoever to attend parliament and seek to urge his team not to vote in the way many seem to have. Where is his leadership? His team have scored a bizarre own goal here and his reputation is even more tattered than before in my eyes. On my calculation (which is not my strongest suit) 33 votes the other way and the decision would not have been the same.

Desperate stuff tonight. I cannot believe members of the Cabinet voted for this. The mesage this sends out to hard working families is absolutely awful. The Prime Minister MUST put forward his own plans to change the expenses system tomorrow.
I wonder how Labour can urge its grassroots to wholeheratedly campaign for it between now and the election when Cabinet ministers behave like this.
Awful, just awful.

Nick,

Its long term vision and priorities.

42 days, 20% tax, inflation are important

expenses are not important

voters won't notice they are all off on holiday soon.

Where is the government indeed?!

Out of touch? Arrogance? Resigned to certain defeat and wanting every last penny before they go?

I don't know what to make of this government anymore. Surely Gordon should have tried to show some sort of leadership or future vision on this matter?!

I'm not sure I can take nearly 2 more years of this. I hope someone organises a protest march against the government fairly soon....... we can't rely on Labour to find the gumption to get rid of Gordon on their own.

#9.

Why exactly do we need the carriers. What will be the use of them.

Surely, it is known that what the military really want and need is more Reaper and Predator. These are un-manned 'planes' which can be controlled at a distance and then used to drop ordnance on 'the enemy'.

Currently, these are controlled from bases in America. Our brave Prince Harry was shown on our screens using a camera operated via computer and 'taking out' the enemy.

We do not need aircraft carriers. They are a job creation scheme and I will tell you now that just like the TSR2 they will never come into operation. They are the equivalent of gunship diplomacy,they are an anachronism.

All you have to look at is what happened in the Great War. At first the officers went over the top with their soldiers, they were annihilated. The senior officers quickly worked out that they were losing the sons of the ruling class in huge numbers. This had to stop so the officers, by the middle of the war, were withdrawn to a safer environment.

It is very expensive to train an officer why lose him in a wasted suicide mission.

So, #9, these carriers are a waste of money, they are a job creation scheme for ensuring votes for labour MPs. They will never be put into service, not unless they have a European crew!

TAG # 40:

This is going off topic, but to answer your question, we need the new carriers (and the aircraft to operate from them) because none of us know from where the next threat to our national security will emerge, or what shape it will take. Defence planning involves making leaps of imagination , not assumptions. Despite being constantly told that the cold war is over, we now see a resurgent Russian military making probing flights to within a few miles of our airspace and coastline. They are not the only potential threat to ouwho r national interests; there are growing military powers around the world. Did you have the foresight to see the Falklands conflict before it errupted? Nobody else did, and without aircraft carriers we would have been unable to liberate the people of those islands.

Disputes over energy supplies, food and even water are entirely possible triggers for future conflict. We need to able to provide defence for ourselves and those rely upon us. Aircraft carriers allow a nation (and we still have vital interests around the globe) to project military force anywhere. We are still an island nation, and we need a strong naval fleet, including modern carriers, escort vessels and submarines to protect us. If necessary the defence budget must be increased to allow for these without depleting spending on the army who are currently engaged in active warfare.

Incidentally, I hope you are wrong about the carriers never coming into service for another reason: it was Harold Wilson's disgraceful decision to scrap the highly successful TSR2 aircraft project (under intense US pressure because it would have robbed them of overseas sales of their inferior aircraft) that directly led to the demise of the British aircraft industry.

I suggest then that 2nd tier officers in district councils get payed too much.

Could anyone elighten me.

Which mega, mega decisions has David Maclean made, then?

43 Shellingout

Well he has alway voted very strongly against a transparent Parliament.

Thats pretty Mega

ask david maclean how hard he fought to get the job and did he check what the wage was before
also ask your own mps if they have read
the lisbon treaty it would take about a year to read and at the end he wouldent know what it meant so how con they vote to accept somthing they dont understand

mega!

Yeah David McClean - have you ever considered you might be 'doing it for your country'?

Shame isn't it - that's the line they love to peddle out when it's public sector pay rises, or the armed forces etc.

Clearly the MP's of our country are not as patriotic as those who are 'prepared to die for our country'
- they don't even get a 3rd tier local council wage packet.

It's about time we got rid of these fools who ride our backs around westminster.

Where does David reside? Maybe I'll stand against him next year on a "I'll make mega mega decisions for nothing" - ticket.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

CarrotsneedQuangos

Oh, that mega, mega decision. It only shows him up to be the truly spineless and contemptable individual we thought he was.

Now that David Davies has resigned from the Shadow front bench and been re-elected presumablyto the back benches, will he be entitled to any parachute payments and if so it woud be nice to know that he has foregone any such claim!