Who should be paid more – MPs or armed services?

NO wonder I’m reluctant to go away. I hadn’t made my way through customs when I heard confirmation MPs were to receive a nine per cent pay rise. And guess what?

It’s out of their hands. They can’t do anything about it. Amazing don’t you think? What’s even more stunning is the statement made by Marcial Boo, chief executive of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa), who said MPs did an important job and should not be paid a ‘miserly amount’.

Now I don’t know what a ‘miserly amount’ is to social workers, nurses, paramedics, etc but I’m pretty sure it isn’t the £67K plus expenses MPs currently receive.

Maybe their jobs are not ‘important’ to Mr Boo?

“MP’s are there to represent us all – to form laws, to send young people to war,” says Mr Boo.

So who should be paid more: those sending to war or those going to war?

I’m guessing the British public regard those fighting terrorism in hostile lands where loss of life and limb is a daily risk are worth considerably more than those strutting around Westminster pontificating about it.

Mr Boo should take the time to find out what happens to those service personnel who return from war zones bereft of limbs and sanity before he makes such arrogant, insulting statements.

The average wait time for treatment of those suffering mental trauma is around two years. How’s that for ‘miserly’ compensation?

NB: Is there any reason why MPs’ salaries cannot simply be linked to the cost of living index?