Conservative MP: I dont want to sit with a different class of people

[MarkLondon]

<snip> Just be grateful third class no longer exists!

But it does! It's what we now call standard class.

From Wikipedia:

During the Victorian era, in the United Kingdom, most trains had three classes of accommodation: First Class (for upper-class people); Second Class (for middle-class people); Third Class (for working-class people). From the 1870s onwards, Second Class (equivalent to either Premium Economy or business class) was gradually abolished and First Class and Third Class were retained. The reason that Second Class was abolished and Third Class retained was that the Railway Regulation Act 1844 required a Third Class service to be offered. In June 1956, Third Class was re-named Second Class, which in turn was renamed Standard Class in the 1980s.

 

[dong20]

But it does! It's what we now call standard class.

... In June 1956, Third Class was re-named Second Class, which in turn was renamed Standard Class in the 1980s.

June 3rd to be precise.

Whatever you want to call it, at least today (in the UK at least) there's a roof, even if quite often - insufficient room to swing a small cat!

It's largely meaningless - for example (one of many) in India 1st class is arguably '3rd class' since AC and AC Exec are above it. I always travelled 2nd class in India - interesting to be sure!

I'd pay good money to see the Wintertons do that!

 

[Jason]

Seems to me that the 1st/2nd class rail fare for MPs debate demonstrates a central problem with MPs' expenses. Once we start pouring over the details we are inevitably going to feel "why should we pay for that?" Surely the answer is to pay them a salary and be done with it. Whether they want to travel 1st or 2nd is then up to them, as is whether they have a second home in London and whether they need a duck house.

Curiously the idea of us paying MPs is quite a recent one. The intention is to make it possible for someone to become an MP irrespective of income. The alternative would be that MPs get no salary but serve on a purely voluntary basis, as our magistrates and our councillors do. Perhaps a salary for MPs could come not from the public but from the political parties.

 

[tomthelad91]

More to the point is do we need that many MPs at all.

America manages with 435, France with 577, Germany with 626, Italy with 630, yet we have 646?

What do MPs do really? Now that everything's privatized they just fanny around making pathetically unimportant legislation.
We could easily manage with 400 MPs.

 

[dandelion]

Seems to me that the 1st/2nd class rail fare for MPs debate demonstrates a central problem with MPs' expenses. Once we start pouring over the details we are inevitably going to feel "why should we pay for that?" Surely the answer is to pay them a salary and be done with it.

hey Jason, we agree on something. They got expenses in the first place purely because they were too embarrassed to give themselves more pay rises.

Curiously the idea of us paying MPs is quite a recent one. The intention is to make it possible for someone to become an MP irrespective of income. The alternative would be that MPs get no salary but serve on a purely voluntary basis, as our magistrates and our councillors do.

I think many local councillors now get rather a lot of, er, expenses too. Members of the house of lords get around #100 per day or #200 including a night. (sorry, pound sign seems to have disappeared)

Perhaps a salary for MPs could come not from the public but from the political parties.

So as the member for 'save whatsit hospital', or' member against political corruption', I would get nothing because I was only representing what local people wanted instead of an established group. No, they should get paid because they are doing work. Unfortunately for MPs I and apparently you and lots of others don't think they deserve to be paid what they are, which is #65,000 basic, plus expenses. Only the top 10% of people in the UK earn more than #50,000 per year. Median wage (half of people more, half less) is #28,000. Should MPs be in the top 10 %? Top 1%?

 

[Drifterwood]

Well, only above certain grades - and it's increasingly exeptional for other than the most senior staff.

Loaded question :smile:, but is that grade commensurate with an MP?

 

[Jason]

We probably need a lot less MPs - with a bit of luck this is something that will be sorted out in the next parliament.

Actually I think they should be paid about what they are paid or a bit more. If we don't have MPs in the top 10% - even the top 1% - we are not paying a salary commensurate with the market rate for the sort of skills we want. But pay them a salary and be done with it. Who pays I think is becoming an issue driven by public opinion. We are getting a national mood of criticising MPs as a class in part because we pay for them. Maybe we should take the heat out of the issue by stopping public payment. MPs in the main parties would not be personally affected. Churches pay for their clergy - why shouldn't political parties pay for their MPs? The potential issue is around the independent MPs - maybe we need some special arrangement for this tiny category.

 

[dong20]

We probably need a lot less MPs - with a bit of luck this is something that will be sorted out in the next parliament.

Actually I think they should be paid about what they are paid or a bit more. If we don't have MPs in the top 10% - even the top 1% - we are not paying a salary commensurate with the market rate for the sort of skills we want. But pay them a salary and be done with it. Who pays I think is becoming an issue driven by public opinion. We are getting a national mood of criticising MPs as a class in part because we pay for them. Maybe we should take the heat out of the issue by stopping public payment. MPs in the main parties would not be personally affected. Churches pay for their clergy - why shouldn't political parties pay for their MPs? The potential issue is around the independent MPs - maybe we need some special arrangement for this tiny category.

The first sentence, I agree with (on the need, that is - not the likelihood. That a (probably) newly elected party seeking to change the system that finally allowed to be brought back in from the wilderness.

That MPs should be paid based on merit, no problem there. It would be about time, though it would probably necessitate replacing most of them.

The rest, well, IMO it's a load of old tosh.

It would almost certainly create a system open to such abuse - financial, sociopolitical, judicial - on so many levels it's hard to know where to begin.

HM (but not for long) Government, LTD (not PLC).

Hell, even the US hasn't sunk so low as to privatise it's adminisration, though a fair few of its denizens have given it their best shot.

Like some of your other suggestions about the EU etc ... did you even think it through ... or did it just tumble out?

 

[mitchymo]

Tory's fury over second-class travel - UK Politics, UK - The Independent


New Conservatives? Yeah right. Luckily for the party, he is retiring so they can say what they want about him. "He is out of touch", "a fool".

All this shows is that the Conservative party have not changed. Posh Bastards then, posh bastards now. Anyone else taking a trip to the seaside this weekend? :biggrin1:

I'm slacking, i really should have jumped on this thread earlier being that i love me those tories!

 

[dong20]

Loaded question :smile:, but is that grade commensurate with an MP?

No, not really - but then I was merely correcting your rather broad generalisation.

I think MPs should be able to travel 1st class when deemed necessary, when they're on official business that is. Subject to some basic fiscal criteria, and auditing of course.

 

[dandelion]

We probably need a lot less MPs - with a bit of luck this is something that will be sorted out in the next parliament.

To the first, dont know what you mean by 'a lot', but yes some less. There is a problem that an MPs job is supposed to be to make laws and run the country, but most of them now spend most of their time sorting out rows between their constituents and local councils, health care, all sorts of stuff which should be the job of the citizens advice bureaus, whose money has been cut while MPs have been getting more money for dealing with constituents personal problems. This is daft and NOT what they are for.

Actually I think they should be paid about what they are paid or a bit more. If we don't have MPs in the top 10% - even the top 1% - we are not paying a salary commensurate with the market rate for the sort of skills we want. But pay them a salary and be done with it.

I didnt used to care what they were paid. What I cared about VERY MUCH was that they were lying and trying to hide what they are paid. But they have blown it now by drawing attention to their, bluntly, fraud.

Quite right, people get paid a market rate for the job. In the case of MPs i am totally certain you could get thousands of competent people willing to do the job for free. I don't think matters should go that far because you would be excluding people who could not afford to take the job and this is fiundamentally undemocratic. But equally there is no reason to pay more than a 'basic' salary. Not a top flight one. I absolutley do not want anyone becoming an MP who believes he could not afford to do the job on less than £50,000 a year. Someone like that is so out of touch with real life in this country he should not be permitted to be an MP. I think it is a very bad trend in modern politics that some people now look on being an MP as a career. I do not want a 'class' of people who run the country. The notion of people choosing to be MPs because it is a well paid job for life is appauling.

I have no problem with MPs getting a top-up from their local party or whoever is promoting them, just so long as it is all publically declared. 100 years ago some local parties expected prospective members to pay them for the privilege of their endorsement. You might find that under 'market forces', people would now be willing to pay for a party endorsement, but that should be a matter for the parties.

 

[Drifterwood]

No, not really - but then I was merely correcting your rather broad generalisation.

That's fine, it was ten years ago that I encountered this and he wasn't very senior. I was quite shocked.

 

[midlifebear]

I have to agree that Winterton's comments are . . . well, those of a pompous ass. However, you folks in the United Kingdom partz should at least be grateful that you have passenger rail service -- that works!

Fly economy class to the USA and then climb aboard an AmTrak train. Ahh. . . .it'll take you back -- to an era where even first class passengers are subject to the same ills as everyone else: constant mechanical failures, constant delays, prissy food car attendants refusing to sell you a Coors beer because "it's agains't my 'union's' rules", getting stuck in the Mojave outside of Las Vegas for five hours in 120 F degree heat and no air conditioning (not because the air conditioning units don't work, but because they might overheat), throngs of screaming children running all over the train as their parents refuse responsibility (because of the loads of Valium they've swallowed), and ancient conductors who ask you eight or twenty times to see your ticket because their brains are slipping and the resultant dementia causes them to forget who you are eight or twenty times on a trip from Salt Lake City to Lost [sic] Angeles (about 750 miles) that can be driven by car in a 3rd of the time. And let's not forget the regularity of derailed trains because of poorly maintained rail beds. They're a special feature. You have to pay extra for one of those runs.

Or you can take a Greyhound bus in which the mentally challenged, criminally insane, and most of the homeless have been housed since Reagan's first year in office and cut the government funding for helping care for those unfortunate folks.

Yeah, come to 'Mericuh for your next long vacation and enjoy our ground-based national public transit systems! You'll have years of anecdotes to tell your friends and family.

 

[SilverTrain]

I have to agree that Winterton's comments are . . . well, those of a pompous ass. However, you folks in the United Kingdom partz should at least be grateful that you have passenger rail service -- that works!

Fly economy class to the USA and then climb aboard an AmTrak train. Ahh. . . .it'll take you back -- to an era where even first class passengers are subject to the same ills as everyone else: constant mechanical failures, constant delays, prissy food car attendants refusing to sell you a Coors beer because "it's agains't my 'union's' rules", getting stuck in the Mojave outside of Las Vegas for five hours in 120 F degree heat and no air conditioning (not because the air conditioning units don't work, but because they might overheat), throngs of screaming children running all over the train as their parents refuse responsibility (because of the loads of Valium they've swallowed), and ancient conductors who ask you eight or twenty times to see your ticket because their brains are slipping and the resultant dementia causes them to forget who you are eight or twenty times on a trip from Salt Lake City to Lost [sic] Angeles (about 750 miles) that can be driven by car in a 3rd of the time. And let's not forget the regularity of derailed trains because of poorly maintained rail beds. They're a special feature. You have to pay extra for one of those runs.

Or you can take a Greyhound bus in which the mentally challenged, criminally insane, and most of the homeless have been housed since Reagan's first year in office and cut the government funding for helping care for those unfortunate folks.

Yeah, come to 'Mericuh for your next long vacation and enjoy our ground-based national public transit systems! You'll have years of anecdotes to tell your friends and family.

Exhibit A in the "Why Americans love their automobiles" dissertation.

My fondest memories of European travels invariably involve the wonderful rail systems.

 

[dong20]

... European travels invariably involve the wonderful rail systems.

So long as one travels off peak (and, ideally not on the weekend).

 

[123scotty]

the whole mp's and whitehall civil servants gravy train has become a bit un-railed now its out in the public domain. it was thatchers way of getting round a salary increase for mp's loyalty. she couldn't have gave an increase as half the country was in chaos. but a laxed expenses system could. this lead to the attitude i could claim for. and now its i need first class. now i need air travel. now i need a new tv for my second home. the system is out of control and needs a major revamp. and as for the attitude of some mp's the cattle that voted them in. easy VOTE them out