Who should be paid more – MPs or armed ser­vices?

Macclesfield Express - - BARLOW’S BRIEF -

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?

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.