Underpaid MPs, Libel online, motivated bikers and some aliens

[matgb]

• 10 pt test for bloggers on defamation | Liberal Conspiracy
  A few assists and pointers on writing about real people online and how to avoid being sued for libel. My legal consultant talls me it's fairly accurate...
  (tags: blogging writing law libel)
• Motivational Posters for those who love bikes
  Not a bad little selection - reposted for those bikers not already reading Jennie (you should be, damnit)
  (tags: humour bikes posters)
• Why the Eurovision bloc voting theory is bogus « doctorvee
  Duncan does his whole 'look, the most popular song won' analysis (again) with good reasoning (again). Pretty sure he's right as well, yes, there are blocks, but El Tel's predictions came next to bottom.
  (tags: Europe politics eurovision)
• MPs' falling pay - Stumbling and Mumbling
  Pay peanuts, get monkeys. That's why most British MPs are useless apparatchiks (well, that and the voting system). While they get way above median, they get way below what the most talented 0.001% of us should earn.
  (tags: MPs parliament)
• davegodfrey: Unimaginative aliens.
  Paleontologist SF geek isn't happy with CGI SF aliens - even Dr Who and Trek did weird better, let alone nature.
  (tags: science scifi aliens)
• Al Qaeda Training Manual - US Air Force
  Um, yeah. Having a copy of the contents of this can get you thrown into jail. Well, if you've got brown skin or you attend a mosque. But the US air force is free to host it on a public website, right? GAH!
  (tags: terrorism USAF Al-Qaeda)

Comments

[matgb]

Oh, I'm not in any doubt that some public sector and academic people will always be on low salary, and it'd be a huge payrise for most people.

But doctors, lawyers, headteachers, business leaders, etc can all expect to earn much more than an MP—60 million of us, 650 MPs, I'd reduce that to about 500 and substantially increase the base salary, while reducing the incidental expenses they can claim—office expenses and staff are fine, but a cup of coffee? I was bought a beer on MP expenses once.

When salaries were introduced they were set toa suitable level to attract "the best", looking at the current lot, we have nowhere near the best. That's partially due to teh electoral system, but I want the House to have top legal brains, top medical types, etc—the country benefits from having the best in the House, for at least a brief period.

You know Sir Isaac Newton was an MP for awhile? Was in the Convention that passed the Bill of Rights—taking 8 years or so out to do work in the House should be a fairly normal thing for the top acheivers, that it isn't is part of the problem.

Of course, the electoral system is a bigger problem but...

[davegodfrey.livejournal.com]

In theory that's what the House of Lords is for. The top science/medical/legal/etc bods are too busy doing their day job (or in the case of science types just find it too much fun) to be interested in taking 8 years out to sit in the commons and groan whenever Dorries or Ruth Kelly open their mouths.

Give them the opportunity of a working peerage when they're getting older and scaling down their workload, and they might well be happy to serve their country, turning up for votes and committees where their expertise is valuable, but staying in the lab when discussing tax credits or something.

[matgb]

Ah, but if we've got a properly responsive voting system and a better class of candidate, time servers like Dorries, Kelly, Bradshaw et al would be, medium term, out on their ear.

That's the problem though—it can't happen at once as the current crop are too offputting. I've no intention of getting there under the current regime anyway, and it's pretty much what I do.

[purplecthulhu.livejournal.com]

Agreed about the electoral system.

I think there are two other problems with the analysis. MP was never, originally, meant to be a full time occupation, and indeed many have other jobs. Minister and above *is* full time. Do they get higher salaries?

Another problem is the whole Party system. If you get someone who has external competence and expertise there's the possibility that their knowledge of the world will clash with Party policy about something (recently practicing medics might object to NHS policy, for example). Better to just get an apparatchick who'll do what they're told. Salary increases won't change this, and it's a growing problem when MPs have more loyalty to their party than to their constituents.

[matgb]

MP was never, originally, meant to be a full time occupation

Originally, no, but the MPs I'm in contact with (admittedly a small subset) normally pull a 60 hour week when the house is in session and 30+ when it's not.

MPs were never meant to be the glorified social worker come local advocate that they've frequently become, but what was 100+ years ago and what is now in terms of job description doesn't compare.

and indeed many have other jobs

Some do, nowhere near the majority, and most will only work very part time in their other work (directorships, occasional legal work, etc).

Ministers do get higher salaries, but even then they're underpaid compared to CEOs of even mid-ranked companies.

Another problem is the whole Party system

Agreed—STV weakens the party system, that's partially why I like it. It also rewards those who build up a local rep, and time and again a "straight talking" MP is shown to be popular within their constituency.