Hard News: Deja Vu
239 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 … 10 Newer→ Last
-
I've sometimes daydreamed that an ideal way to determine MPs' salaries would be to link them directly to the average full-time wage.
I'd go one further and make it a multiplier of the minimum wage.
-
Didn't it used to be a Deputy Principal's salary - back when that was a role held in unifoirmly high esteem?
-
I don't have a particular problem with the salaries earned by our MPs. And most ministers would probably be able to earn a lot more if they were in the private sector.
And most of the expenses being claimed seem reasonable. But there appear to be a couple of examples where, potentially due to some trickery and clever structuring, ministers are able to claim large sums of puiblic money.
I have no difficulty with someone structuring their affairs so as to minimise their tax liability, so long as it's legal. But when that structuring allows someone to claim large amounts of money from the public, it becomes a potential problem.
I still don't know how all the expenses rules work, but it sounds odd to me that a minister can own a house in Wellngton and get paid to rent another. Or can put a house in another entity's name and claim he doesn't "own" it. Again, I've no problem with that if English is doing it to minimise tax liability. But is that why he did it? There's something that smells about the whole thing.
I'd also be interested to know what the practice was under the previous government. Labour MPs are not openly attacking English, which makes me suspicious.
-
But Craig, as any conservative would tell you, there's a big difference between you keeping more of your own money and you helping yourself to some of mine ;-)
But there's also forms of tax avoidance that aren't so bad when nice middle-class people do it. :)
I've often thought that one attraction of a flat tax code, no exemptions, is that it would be a damn sight more kosher and would do something about the idea that if you can afford to hire people who can manipulate a Byzantine tax code you can shuffle the tax burden elsewhere.
-
Sacha,
Good on Heather Roy, Chris Finlayson and Peter Dunne for not renting out their Wellington houses and getting the rest of us to shout them another one. Not that I want either families being split up or all our representatives living in Welli and further isolating them from the rest of the whenua.
Those three already lived in a Wellington electorate. So couldn't claim an out-of-Wellington allowance (there will be other housing stuff no doubt). Though from this Scoop item of 2005 this discussion is nothing new.
Former Agriculture Minister Jim Sutton did not decide to resign voluntarily, he was pushed. His crime? Firstly for having the biggest swing against him and secondly for announcing that he had bought a house in Waikanae and was going to stand for the Wellington Labour list next election. Sutton was valuable while he was a rural voice but the party had no need for yet another MP who wants to live just the distance needed to qualify for the Wellington housing allowance.
-
I'd also be interested to know what the practice was under the previous government. Labour MPs are not openly attacking English, which makes me suspicious.
To be fairly cynical, Scotty, remember when Labour tried to make hay out of the MP for Helensville living in a Parnell "mansion" -- only to have it turn into egg facials? I'm sure Goff does. :)
-
I'd also be interested to know what the practice was under the previous government. Labour MPs are not openly attacking English, which makes me suspicious.
I am sure, because this is acceptable practice,it hasn't been questioned. Helen had an apartment in Wellington (so says Duncan Garner) and lived at Premier House(or whatever it's called) so she probably rented it out at least whilst residing there, but then again maybe not.Labour were pretty good at slagging trusts that National seem to hide behind so it would be nice if they didn't do this themselves.Maybe something will come out today if they are sitting.
-
I don't have a particular problem with the salaries earned by our MPs. And most ministers would probably be able to earn a lot more if they were in the private sector.
I've always liked the idea of MP's salaries being zero with all relevant expenses being covered and a means-tested allowance in place to cover the necessities of mortgage/family etc.
It might move us away from the impression that political service is a front row seat on the gravy train and perhaps deter those who are in it, at least partly, for the money.
Representing and advocating for your country is a bloody privilege and all those who put their hands up to do so should be encouraged to view the role in an altruistic and humble manner.
/wishful thinking
-
And just to make nice for a moment, nice to hear that Charles Chauvel has said Labour will be supporting any government bill to abolish the partial defense of provocation. The only bitch I've got that it should have happened years ago, but better late than never.
-
I don't have a particular problem with the salaries earned by our MPs. And most ministers would probably be able to earn a lot more if they were in the private sector.
I don't have a problem with them earning a lot of money. I'd just like it to be a multiplier of the minimum wage and to increase at the same annual rate.
-
If it is unpaid then only the rich can afford to do it. Is that really what we want?
-
Then we get this .
-
I agree with Sacha.And if absolutely all living expenses are paid, with no salary, wouldn't the volume of rorts simply multiply?
I don't see what's wrong with MPs earning a good salary. The majority of them work long hours and make enormous sacrifices in terms of family and social life.
-
Then we get this .
Hate to say it, Sofie, but I'll hold off the celebrations until I've seen the terms of reference -- the malicious little fuck of a demon being in the details, and all that. But I guess one thing Key has learned from Moat-gate in the UK is that this tends to be the kind of thing that you shouldn't gamble will go away if you just ignore it, or try to brazen it out.
-
I'd also be interested to know what the practice was under the previous government. Labour MPs are not openly attacking English, which makes me suspicious.
It appears there may have been an informal agreement not to make a meal of it, in advance of the publication of the figures. But Darren Hughes keeps saying the rules changed after the election.
Labour MPs are also saying Clark kept a watch on the issue, which wouldn't be surprising given that she had two ministers -- Marian Hobbs and Phillida Bunkle -- stood down for an inquiry over Wellington accommodation expenses in 2001.
They were both cleared, but Bunkle was one of those just-over-the-border Kapiti residents. As I recall, Hobbs' case was different -- her main residence was in Christchurch (although she was on the Wellington Central roll) and she was in the position she was in in part because her mariiage had broken up.
National did make a bloody banquet of it at the time. Joe Hendren has a very interesting post about what both Bill English and Murray McCully said in 2001 about Hobbs and Bunkle claiming out-of-town expenses while largely living in Wellington. Things they might wish to forget ...
And DPF brought it up when he was again on the case recently:
Maybe a journalist could ask how many MPs are living in a place they own in Wellington, and what proportion of them are claiming the maximum $24,000 in interest payments? The Parliamentary Service won’t release individual details, but they might release summary information.
He was bagging the Greens' practice of renting houses back from their own super scheme (and he actually had an interesting point). He's fairly consistent on the issue today, but his language is, shall we say, softer.
-
Hey I figure, if this is going to be the knee( circle) jerk reactionary party, may as well yank their chain :)
-
I don't see what's wrong with MPs earning a good salary.
Don't think most people do -- within reason. I think what does get people's hackles up (which we saw in the UK) is politicians who think they can get on the public teat and there's no quid pro quo involved in the form of high levels of public disclosure and scrutiny.
The majority of them work long hours and make enormous sacrifices in terms of family and social life.
Yes... but so do good teachers, doctors and nurses, firefighters, Police officers and so on. Plenty of people work damn unsocial hours, or under considerable stress that all too often has blowback for the people around them.
Sorry if I sound a bit prickish here, but if anyone has been forced into Parliament at gunpoint they probably shouldn't be there at all.
-
Sorry if I sound a bit prickish here, but if anyone has been forced into Parliament at gunpoint they probably shouldn't be there at all.
Aye.
-
But Darren Hughes keeps saying the rules changed after the election.
Mr Head, let me introduce you to Mr Desk. Slamdance!
-
Don't think most people do -- within reason. I think what does get people's hackles up (which we saw in the UK) is politicians who think they can get on the public teat and there's no quid pro quo involved in the form of high levels of public disclosure and scrutiny.
I agree there should be full disclosure on all expenses. But that's a slightly different issue to the matter of salaries.
Yes... but so do good teachers, doctors and nurses, firefighters, Police officers and so on. Plenty of people work damn unsocial hours, or under considerable stress that all too often has blowback for the people around them.
I agree (again!). My wife, before she finished work to be an at-home mum, was a secondary school teacher and worked much longer hours than me and for much less money. Teachers, nurses etc are underpaid.
That doesn't mean MPs are overpaid, though.
-
That doesn't mean MPs are overpaid, though.
I, personally, think there's something very, very wrong when elected officials are earning above even the 85th - never mind the 95th! - percentile of national income distribution. We're not the developing world, for crying out loud.
-
That doesn't mean MPs are overpaid, though.
Up to a point, Lord Copper. :) "Overpaid" isn't the right word, but I've little patience for the argument that 'we're entitled to it, because we've taken such a huge paycut to enter politics'. In most cases, I think any halfway competent MP could make a damn sight more (and have a more agreeable lifestyle) elsewhere. But, once more, nobody fraking forced any of them to stand. There are plenty of people who make changes in their lives, and accept that a drop in income is part of the opportunity cost.
I don't want to see MPs eating grass and sharing a urine-scented doorway with Blanket Man but a little fraking modesty wouldn't hurt.
-
Where’s the fun in that? Sophistry is Mark’s bag.
Yeah, but does it matter if he gets there in the end.
<shrug> Seems to matter him, judging by his response to you. I’d just suggest he cut the robbery-like rhetorical style (not that he’s likely to want advice from me).
…So to me Nik's question seemed moot.
My comments were in response to what you actually wrote at the time, not to what you now claim to think or to have meant.
-
I don't want to see MPs eating grass and sharing a urine-scented doorway with Blanket Man
Not all MPs, of course. Just those we don't like :-)
-
Scott, so that would be roughly half of them in any given Session? ;)
Post your response…
This topic is closed.