Salaried MP's

I have no axe to grind whether MP's get a salary increase or not. What really worries me is the idea that an MP is in salaried employment. A career MP! Old fashioned as I maybe I thought politics was all about being driven by some principal, some sense of social well being, the desire to serve the Nation and to its citizens. I cannot square these two views. If you are salaried, your career depends on you hanging on in there, going with the flow, keeping hold of your job by finding the middle non-contentious ground so you are always in employment. Surely this is the exact opposite of what our MP's should be doing?

The vary last comparison I would want to make with an MP is a Bank employer or even a Doctor or Teacher. A career requires you to compromise, to fit-in with the aims of your current employer, to subsume your own aspirations and get behind what ever is the current corporate objective, no matter what your personal views. I really do expect an MP to have ideals, to believe in and standby those ideals, to argue and fight for those ideals and to be prepared to stand-down if those ideals fail to win majority support.

Everyone should be eligible to stand as an MP, irrespective of background and certainly not restricted only to those of independent means. Therefore so that those in the lowest paid sectors of  society too have the real option I can agree that a non-discriminatory income needs to go with being elected. Clearly the cost of representing a northern seat is of a different order to the cost of that in one of the Home Counties. The incurred costs of representing your seat should be funded by the Nation. Why does a healthcare worker on or near the minimum wage need to put on a salary scale on par with a Doctor, Bank Manger or Teacher just to serve as an MP? If you are not on the minimum wage you can afford the gamble, if your passion to serve is strong enough, to resume your career if the gamble fails. You are sufficiently well cushioned that you do not need any state intervention to be able to stand, if chosen.

Being an MP opens many doors of opportunities. It gives you an unparalleled access to a wide network of contacts that would never be possible without serving as an MP. Many perfectly legal opportunities open up, during and subsequent to your seat as are very many more totally unacceptable and highly dubious opportunities to cream off the top. That is why we want our MP's to be driven by principle and not by greed. So an income just above minimum wage, sufficient to ensure all can serve. The running costs actually incurred and verified to be reimbursed. If gifted person are thereby discouraged from offering themselves because they might lose out on the deal then the Nation does not need them and is far better off without their opportunism. So principled persons with a desire to serve, roll up roll up!

Postscript. Should MP's use First Class travel? No, no, no special privileges to set them apart. They must live the lives of all other citizens who have to cope with the rules they pass through parliament. If anything their lives should be made more onerous, be wide open to the full wrath of the state against the citizen. I would like to see MP's sign on weekly and then have to justify that they were working full time as an MP and did attend parliament session before they could claim their wage and expenses.

Smug to Judge

A scientific study has shown that the wealthy sic successful become desensitised to the real problems other 'unsuccessful' people face. They become harsher and more willing to be critical of failure to achieve without those benefits that their own success bestows on them. Quickly forgetting the past struggles they had to surmount those same problems that suddenly disappeared when they had the added clout of success. Success does indeed breed an attitude of success which then surmounts obstacles.

Vince Cable generally gives the impression of someone who has ideas and does test them before mouthing out. So I was taken aback when he took a neutral line with Zero Hour Contracts. How can you be neutral? This is abusive advantage taking of the vulnerable. It is disgraceful, how can any MP condone such practice.

The unemployed are pressurised and intimidated by the real possibility of benefit withdrawal unless they can weekly demonstrate they are seeking work and are willing to take work any offered. There are no middle grounds. They are subjected to weekly scrutiny by uncivil servants to see to just that. Uncivil servants that are no doubt themselves performance monitored to ensure they wrinkle out the target margins.

Potential Employers can hang out the bait of work and can then haul in a rich harvest of unemployed desperate to keep their benefits alive. All without cost or commitment from them, just hang this out on the line of hope and expectation. Zero hours means they contract nothing but the lure of a promise, yet require the applicant to to commit to making themselves available at a moments notice. To be plucked, at their leisure, if and when they have a passing moment off work increase. Outrageous. Totally an unfair terms contract.

The most evil act one person can play on another is to falsely raise hope and expectations. All the more so when that other person is vulnerable, threatened and in need of hope. A hope that is going to based on the shallow insubstantial offer of a possible something in the wind. Wake up Ed Balls there are no positives, this is an evil manifest.