Will it make any difference?

[observer]

In May, there will be (whoever wins); the biggest turn round of MPs since 1945 - will it make any difference to the way Parliament operates? After all, they still havn't gotten rid of the expenses/allowances system etc, which remains open to abuse - rather than scrapping all perks in favour of a basic salary. Will we finally get a 100% elected second chamber? Will there be a separation of the Executive and Legislature? Will we get a written constitution, and 4 yearly Parliaments? Will they be prepared to devolve powers down to Local Authorities or grab even more to themselves, as Brussels takes it from them? OR will the situation be even worse than ever, in the sense of electing naive and conformist lobby fodder, to be said and led by their Leaders?

[LymmParent]

It won't make a jot of difference, because all the people standing for election are well grounded in the way things run. Expenses have to be awarded if you've got people coming from all over the place to a London "office". Otherwise, every MP would need a different salary, and it would have to be reassessed every time the job changed hands.

 

It's not perfect, and there was some naughtiness over exes last year, but after a complete audit and intense scutiny from media and public looking for any trace of scandal, we found that the vast majority of MPs were clean. Not perfect - what system is? - but still one of the most effective in the world.

[observer]

So, how does it work for the Plebs: say two folk working in Warrington, one lives round the corner, the other commutes from Manchester - does the Manc get travelling expenses?

[Bazj]

Talking of travelling expenses..... in my former life as a contract electrician, I worked for many years on Kelloggs in Trafford Park, but for a company based in Warrington. They paid travel expenses based on various industry standards and as a young 20 year old driving a big 3 litre 4x4 Granada, it just about paid the bills!

 

There were a load of lads on the site who worked for the same company as me. but most lived in Stretford and as such they were entitled to the same expenses based on the location of the site from the office in Warrington! They all walked to work and made a fortune!

 

Life was unfair even back then!

[observer]

Thought things like that would be included in the contract price - that way, it might make the employment of local labour cheaper? As for the MPs; the provision of a simple banding allowance based on the distance of their Constitutioncy from London would deal with the issue; what we don't want, is any possibility of politicians making up their own rules, to be administered by themselves, and allows then to get their sticky fingers anywjhere near the till.

[LymmParent]

A simple banding allowance is how they all ended up claiming a grand per telly..... let's not go there again.

 

It is reasonable and fair to pay someone's travel expenses if you expect them to work away from the office. So if you say the office is in London, MPs should be paid for travel to their patch and vice versa. I work from here, and if any client wants me to go and work on site, I charge them my expenses at cost. Where MPs should be reined in is the permitted cost. Standard rail fare, not first class and standard mileage, not their entire fuel bill. Same as any other worker.

[observer]

What's TVs got to do with a banding allowance based on distance from home-work? Expenses ) for which they have to get involved in making a claim) are how they got into the mess in the first place, as expenses were used as a subsistute for basic pay rises. Just pay 'em a salary, supply a flat in London - but don't get them involved in accountancy.

[LymmParent]

You said flat salary, banded according to distance from home base to London, no exes. That means the salary banding has to be set to cover the most expensive journey in the banding. So someone is going to make a profit. Or, the banding is set lower, so someone is making a loss - which means they'll just avoid travel if possible. Not ideal.

 

The expenses allowances were set in that fashion for household items, so if an MP bought a telly, there was a guideline amount that could be claimed without question - and it was a flaming sight more than the average price of a telly. Ditto everything else.

 

The fair and sensible way to remunerate any worker is to set a salary for the value of work done and then reimburse any genuine expenses at best-value cost. Nobody should be making a profit and nobody should have to dip into their core salary in order to do their job properly.

[observer]

Cross purposes methinks: an allowance based on miles from London - longer the distance, more the alliowance. Free flat provided in London. Everything else paid from a basic salary that' transparent to the public. NO exes: furniture. TVs etc can be paid out of their basic salary, like the rest of us.

[Wireless]

No difference whatsoever .Good MPs go into politics to make a difference for the better, most MPs go into politics to make a difference to their bank balance.

 

The three former ministers caught out in the lobbying sting are all Blairites whos careers went down the pan when Blair left, so they looked for money elsewhere.Likewise for the Tories caught out in the nineties, once they realised they had no chance of ministerial dosh.

 

Forget the MPs. We need a massive overhaul of the entire democratic system in this country.Real PR,elected second chamber, flat salaries, independent MPs/parliament watchdogs, MP recall procedures...the works.

[observer]

I'll vote for that Wirels - are you standing?!