[Closed] ministers take 5% pay cut!

5 year contract, option to take additional jobs, most expenses paid, £40k a year for partner.

What will those nasty Tories think of next?

They'd have to think a little harder if they think this is going to pull the wool over peoples eyes. (sun reader's excluded.)

They'd have to think a little harder if they think this is going to pull the wool over peoples eyes. (sun reader's excluded.)

Imagine the outcry if they'd put their pay [b]up[/b] by 5%. Oh, but I forgot - a Tory government (even one in coalition) can't do [i]anything[/i] right, can it? 🙄

Andy

It's a gesture - I mean 5% is hardly likely to bring the company back into financial health, but at least they have done something and something positive at that. As you say, much better than all the posturing that has happened in past governments (of all flavours) and the MPs collectively voting for a pay rise.

It's their pocket money. They won't notice.

It's a gesture - I mean 5% is hardly likely to bring the company back into financial health, but at least they have done something and something positive at that.

It's a lot more than I've ever experienced within a business that's hacking everything to the bone...

Fair enough. Echoes what will happen to public employee salaries over the coming years I think. Can't ask thousands of others to take a pay cut unless you're prepared to take one yourself.

ratherbeintobago - Member

They'd have to think a little harder if they think this is going to pull the wool over peoples eyes. (sun reader's excluded.)

Imagine the outcry if they'd put their pay up by 5%. Oh, but I forgot - a Tory government (even one in coalition) can't do anything right, can it?

Andy

I think that you've got a point there 😉

5% is just piss take considering that all the ministers will be earning far more money than they were last week. Anyone who falls for this is an idiot should have been at least 15%.

I blame Thatcher 30yrs ago.

Most of 'em don't [i]need[/i] the money.

I blame her now. And that Neville Chamberlain. Dodgy bloke. Never trusted him. Eyes too close together.

I blame Churchill - if he'd let that nice Mr Hitler win the war then the whole of Europe would be run in an efficient and orderly manner!

Better than nothing, and for context 5% is the number the company I work for wanted to apply to all employees globally. Employment laws in the US allowed this to happen without consent of the employee, us Euros on the other hand were asked to opt in.......can't think of a single name over here that did.

To those that are moaning, is -5% better than nothing or would you rather they just didn't bother.....? I'm not saying it shouldn't be higher but better this than Fanny Adams......

This is ridiculous. MPs pay should be increased substantially and the rates should be decided by an independent body. The pay body should reference the pay rates of hospital consultants, lawyers, politicians in other countries and the like. Expenses should be cut radically.

The whole expenses scandal was brought about by MPs being too scared to vote themselves realistic pay increases over many years and then trying to get something back under the counter. Take the matter out of MPs hands and start off from a decent rate.

It's all very well for Cameron and Osbourne to take a pay cut. They are [i]extremely [/i]wealthy in their own right. I do not want only people from a wealthy background to see politics as a good career.

done it for the PR - which is very good publicity for them- but really do any of those people look like they are scared where the money for then next gas bill payment is coming from? Easy to cut 5% from your salary when you are a millinairre and dont need the money

donald +1

We pay our politicians peanuts in comparison to the rest of the western world. Double, or even trebble their sallary, attract the really good people into politics, and have a set expenses setup. I.e. provide them with an office and flat in London, give them a secretary and researcher from the civil service, anything else is their own problem.

It would be nice if some of the long-time Tory haters on here could give the new government MORE THAN A DAY before launching into the same repetitive whinging and bitching that we've had to put up with for the last 3 months.

I assume those complaining (a) voted in the first place and (b) are prepared to accept a voluntary 15% increase in tax, since they feel that the new government shouldn't be entitled to a pay rise consomethinge with their new jobs and responsibilities.

I'll see you back here in a year and we'll discuss whether things have improved.

donald et al - this is a pay cut for cabinet minister salaries, not MP salaries. Not the same thing at all.

Donald - the last thing we need are career politicians, one of the new Labour MPs is barely out of [s]nappies[/s] University. Let them get out and get a proper job first, experience the world outside Westminster, and then go into politics.
fwiw the LibDem cabinet ministers are also loaded after senior jobs in the City or industry.

This is ridiculous. MPs pay should be increased substantially and the rates should be decided by an independent body. The pay body should reference the pay rates of hospital consultants, lawyers, politicians in other countries and the like. Expenses should be cut radically.

The Review Body on Senior Salaries is nominally independent & is responsible for setting MPs' salaries, in line with the civil service. When you take into account expenses (which senior doctors don't get) MPs' pay is pretty similar to hospital consultant's pay. As lawyers are (mainly) in the private sector, their pay varies wildly.

Andy

eton, oxbridge, etc

as this parliament is the most toff laden in a while i suspect none of them have to worry how long it is till pay day each month 5% makes very little difference

not that im bitter but i make my own sarnies every day, i wonder if they do?

So how much does the average Cabinet Minister earn?

Does this cut put them just below the super tax band? 😕

oxbridge

The thing is with suggesting upping the salary to attract the best - I'm not sure I want MPs/ministers doing it just for the money either. It's not as if even a basic MP's salary is exactly putting them on the breadline.

So how much does the average Cabinet Minister earn?

Ask and ye shall receive - [url= http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-information-office/m06.pdf ]link[/url] (though this hasn't been updated with the 5% cut yet)

Does this cut put them just below the super tax band?

Looks like they were well below it to begin with; PM isn't, but even with the cut he'll still be over the threshold.

Andy

So how much does the average Cabinet Minister earn?

http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/latest-news/2010/05/a-new-politics-cutting-ministerial-pay-50065

[i]That's far from a guarantee, or even an indicator that you're loaded.[/i]

Indeed. 😳

[i]So how much does the average Cabinet Minister earn?[/i]

Roughly 145K, so slightly less than 3 Birmingham bin men, or 20K more than 1 council electrician 🙂

Those who come out against our leaders being toffs: In 2004 Churchill was voted Greatest Ever Briton.
Um he was born in Blenheim Palace. If you've ever seen it, it's quite a big house. In fact, it's a palace. His father was a Lord. He was landed gentry.
Did a damn good job in trying times by all accounts

yeah but surely eaton is

and while i acknowledge that oxbridge doesnt = minted having worked at part of cambridge uni for a few years i can assure you that the bulk of students parents earn way above the national average

it does seem a shame that if you want to work as a politician to better the country youd best make sure you are from a certain demographic

ie white, well off and male

churchill was also voted out of office after the war as he was bitterly opposed to the formation of a national health service for everyone

being pm during a war doesnt make you any more able to relate to the needs of the little person

it's not just a 5% cut in salary, the number of cabinet seats has been reduced as well, so it's case of more responsibility AND a 5% cut for those in the cabinet. Which is a pretty sensible approach really.

as this parliament is the most toff laden in a while i suspect none of them have to worry how long it is till pay day each month 5% makes very little difference

A great deal of politicians went to private school. It's just that some joined the Conservative Club and others joined the Marxist Society at uni...

They're all the same privileged bunch.

having worked at part of cambridge uni for a few years i can assure you that the bulk of students parents earn way above the national average

face it the odds against anyone on here having a child who will ever be PM or even an MP are very low

unless your of course your kids are currently at eaton and you think the football players at your golf club are lowering the tone no matter how many maseratis they own

being pm during a war

face it the odds against anyone on here having a child who will ever be PM or even an MP are very low

Just because you went to a major public school such as Eton does not necessary mean you have vast wealth, I know plenty of people who did and haven't. There are scholarships (Eton would have had 5 100% fee scholarships in Cameron's day), bursaries or some employers (notably the services and the foreign office) pay a proportion of the fees. Quite a few ways to go without it costing the earth, then there are parents who think such an education is important and sacrifice everything to put their children through it.

[i]You do realise that wasn't the only time Churchill was PM?[/i]

but his 2nd term isnt the reason he was voted greatest britain, was it?

[i]Indeed - probably about as low as the chances of your child being England football captain or playing in the Premiership [/i]
football does not discriminate on the basis of education, though you need to get spotted by a club !

I'm sure my son has less chance of being England football captain than the son of somebody who likes football. That's discrimination - why shouldn't my son get the same chance as everybody else? Just because he has the misfortune to be born to middle class parents who prefer cycling. What we need is a bit of positive discrimination to balance things out - a set % of football apprenticeships should be reserved for the children of those people who were always picked last at school.

but his 2nd term isnt the reason he was voted greatest britain, was it?

[i]Well it's just about as relevant as your comments about him being voted out.[/i]

i disagree, my point was that as an aristocrat he didnt see the need for a public health service that included looking after the poor

football does not discriminate on the basis of education, though you need to get spotted by a club !

I refer you to [i]Why England Lose: And other curious phenomena explained[/i] by Kuper & Szymanski. Among other things (and you'll have to bear with me because my copy's on loan) it said that actually being picked up by a football club in the UK actually discriminates [b]against[/b] education & having professional parents, simply because the demands of having to take the child to/from training camps etc. are incompatible with full-time work.

Andy

my point was that as an aristocrat he didnt see the need for a public health service that included looking after the poor

You should check your history books, kimbers. Your point is fundamentally wrong - but don't let that stop you in your class war crusade.

BTW in case it needs mentioning, I'm not a toff - far from it. I've also probably had closer contact with far more of them than you, and I can't say I'm particularly a fan of many of them - it's just that unlike you I don't see why it should disqualify somebody from holding political office. Surely a high standard of education (Eton/Oxbridge) is actually an advantage in people we expect to take difficult and important decisions?

football does not discriminate on the basis of education,

neither does politics. what grades do you need to stand for election?
last time i looked anyone can stand, so long as they can put down the deposit, which they get back if they poll 5% of the votes cast.

[i]You should check your history books, kimbers. Your point is fundamentally wrong - but don't let that stop you in your class war crusade.[/i]

really, i got my information from simon schamas history of britain thingy

and a qick google tells me the conservatives under winston voted against teh formation of the nhs 21 times

They'd have to think a little harder if they think this is going to pull the wool over peoples eyes. (sun reader's excluded.)

OK, just updated this to: They'd have to think a little harder if they think this is going to pull the wool over peoples eyes. (sun reader's AND some Singletrack Forum members excluded.)

If it had been 20-30% cut, it would have been a better message to send to the electorate. 5% cut is an insult to people's intelligence. Of course you'd have to have some in the first place to realise you've been insulted.

Complainers: please go out tomorrow and set up a direct debit giving another 5% of your pay to charity.

No? Then stop whinging.

It's a bit of a token gesture, but worthwhile and a warning to all of us in the public sector that we may be next. Cabinet ministers are showing that nobody is going to be able to carry on as they were.

I agree we need to give this coalition time to settle in before we start reverting to the same old dull "Fatcha" abuse - let's wait till they deserve it.

And lets bear in mind that this time the Lib Dems are involved, it's not just the Tories.

And while I agree about concerns over career politicians and toffs with no real world experience, a lot of people were clearly asleep for 13 years if they thought that the NuLab heirarchy had come from the local comprehensive, had to miss out on university due to cash worries and done several years manual labour before suddenly becoming MPs!

so what about the 4 lonely women in the cabinet?

only a year ago callmedave said 1/3rd of the cabinet would be women

http://www.****/news/article-1175106/A-Tory-Government-ministers-women-claims-Cameron.html

so what about the 4 lonely women in the cabinet?

My wife voted for the conservatives in the election.. I'm joking of course, there isn't a polling station in my kitchen.

look, there is no gesture. these people still get their mp's salary, the ministerial bit is extra... a bit like overtime. they haven't even been paid it yet so where is the sacrifice? i'd be more than happy to sacrifice 100% of what i haven't got.

[i]A great deal of politicians went to private school. It's just that some joined the Conservative Club and others joined the Marxist Society at uni...

They're all the same privileged bunch. [/i]

Some of which put there excellent education and priviliged background to try and help those less fortunate, the others try and keep the excellent educations etc to there own kind.

Dont knock people for having a priviliged background - knock them for what they do (or dont) do with it instead.

"try and keep the excellent educations etc to there own kind. "

That would be the ones who abolished the grammar school system - like it or not, it was the best chance this country ever gave the bright kids from poorer backgrounds the chance to better themselves and their familes.

And it was abolished by the very people who had benefited from it most

As a teacher I really do fail to see how grammar schools help, also if they were abolished how come there are so many round here?

Well, as I understand it our new [i]female[/i] Home Secretary, and only the second ever, went to a comprehensive. Harriett Harman's a Baroness, IIRC.
I believe the only actual working class member of the last government was Prescott, and he certainly milked the fact for all it was worth. Most of the rest were pretty close to being toffs as far as I could see, certainly they had extremely privileged backgrounds, while using class as a weapon to beat the Tories with. I hate hypocrites.
And I am working class. And I hate what Labour did for the last thirteen years. If I hadn't had certain ties I would have left the country.

Brown did not have an "extremely privileged background" at all - his dad was a Church of Scotland minister. Having known a couple of ministers' sons, I can assure you that although they often get a nice manse while they are employed at the local church, they are not rolling in cash by any means.

Clare Short came from a working class background and worked her way up through university and student grants that her colleagues all got and later abolished for others.

John Reid's parents were a postie and a process worker. David Blunkett's dad was killed in an awful industrial accident (for which no compensation was paid bc he was over retirement age) and grew up poor. Robin Cook's dad was a chemistry teacher which wasn't growing up in squalor but it's hardly an extremely privileged background.

Alan Milburn, Margarett Beckett, Jack Straw were all from working class backgrounds and went to state schools (Straw's was a state-funded grammar school, if that makes a difference).

I'm not saying that their working class credentials made them better politicians - Jack flipping Straw! - and neither am I saying that the Labour cabinet did not have people that [i]did [/i]come from privileged backgrounds - Patricia Hewitt! - , but it's just factually not true that they most were "close to being toffs" and all from privileged backgrounds.

It's also not true that Labour used class as a weapon to beat the Tories with for thirteen years. It's simply a fiction. It's almost as if you have entirely missed out on the rise and reign of Blairism (lucky you...). Blair's government was one that was petrified of the "C" word and had Mandelson out telling the world "we are intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich".

Double, or even treble their salary, attract the really good people into politics

set % of football apprenticeships should be reserved for the children of those people who were always picked last at school.

Great so in life we pick people who have no talent for things rather than find something they are good at and improve on that?

Whooooosh.

To go back to the original point.

Cameron is a PR flack - and this is a PR move pure and simple.

I don't see it as important in any way but it does set a tone of austerity and does give him a weapon to use when he starts cutting elsewhere. "we shared your pain"

The whole issue of MPs remuneration needs to be dealt with. Certainly our politicians are lower paid than many - but I think they are well enough paid anyway. more than twice average earnings. Its all the expenses and allowances that need to be dealt with as for too long they have used allowances to increase their earnings.

Decent payrise and simplify and stop / decrease allowances. Thats where I would go. As pointed out above there is no shortage of people who want to be MPs.

So how much does the average Cabinet Minister earn?

Roughly 145K, so slightly less than 3 Birmingham bin men, or 20K more than 1 council electrician

So a Brum bin man earns 50k a year and a council electrician 125k? :S surely not.. I am hoping a missed something there.. 😀

You are all missing the real point behind this gesture:
Ireland has cut the pay of state employees by 15%, Greece by 20%, Spain now by 5%.
Our ecomomy is in a similar desperate condition to the above, it's a question of cutting public expenditure or the IMF will do it for us.
The cabinet ministers pay cut is designed to prepare you state employees for similar cuts.

Here ya go maxray 🙂
[url] http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6982335.ece [/url]

Under UK law the pay of state employees cannot be cut.

But ministers are state employees right?

cripes 145k would cover my entire watches wage for the year ;-(

But ministers are state employees right?

[b]Our ecomomy is in a similar desperate condition[/b] to the above, it's a question of cutting public expenditure or the IMF will do it for us.