reduce the number of MHKs.

reduce cost of government 

Why the contribution is important

we have too many draining our public purse 

by ANDREWQ1 on April 05, 2017 at 09:49PM

Current Rating

Average rating: 5.0
Based on: 11 votes


  • Posted by Topaz April 06, 2017 at 16:03

    I agree completely AND review their entitlement to life long pension when only a year or two in office - another drain on the purse strings
  • Posted by thinktank April 06, 2017 at 16:46

    I do think it disgraceful that after only one term in office MHK's can get a life long pension when the rest of us smucks have to pay into a pension pot for 40+ years and it may rise and fall. The MHK's should have a sliding scale in terms of pension i.e. One term in office £5,000 per year, Two terms £15,000 per year, Three terms £20,000, Four terms £25,000, Five + terms £40,000. That's 25 years working for a good pension........ that way they may be more willing to take good long term decisions as they might still be in office.
  • Posted by dpfellows April 06, 2017 at 21:57

    How many would be needed in your opinion? If there were fewer should we be looking at remunerating them better?

    Given that the cost of the pension to taxpayers is about 40% of salary per annum very serious consideration needs to be given to an affordable pension scheme - a defined contribution cash scheme rather than a defined benefit finals average salary based scheme. 40% would fall to about 10%.
  • Posted by George April 10, 2017 at 14:00

    Also, if they are booted out they are continued to be paid for 6 months afterwards at full pay (40k a year salary that's 20k of costs) they should have 1 month's notice like most other normal folk would have to find a new job!
Log in or register to add comments and rate ideas

Idea topics