Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35789054)

Yes, but it's not in his gift to set the pay rates for MPs no matter how much you may despise him or want to say that he's a hypocrit. It's down to a supposidly independent committe that was set up in the wake of previous pay scandals that were perpetrated by MP's setting their own pay rates.

Don't get me wrong, I think it stinks but that's the way it is at the moment in the absence of a better method like linking MP's pay to a multiple of the average wage for example.

Originally Posted by tweetiepooh (Post 35789165)

If you set up an "independent" body then you abide by its ruling. If they were awarded 1% and voted to refuse it everyone would up in arms that they don't follow the ruling. They are awarded a "big" rise, accept it and everyone complains that they do so.

Originally Posted by tweetiepooh (Post 35789165)

If you set up an "independent" body then you abide by its ruling. If they were awarded 1% and voted to refuse it everyone would up in arms that they don't follow the ruling. They are awarded a "big" rise, accept it and everyone complains that they do so.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy (Post 35789170)

We've already discussed how independent the panel was and the conclusion I drew was not very

Originally Posted by Mick Fisher (Post 35789300)

IMO it would be naive, to say the least, to reach any other conclusion.