So when do I get my 11% pay rise? I'm already paying for it, after all

Oh boy. So. In my country, we have a relatively new system of determining our Members of Parliament's pay. We used to allow them to vote for their own pay rises, which went on for quite the while before we all cottoned on to the fact that quite frankly that is one of the stupidest ideas ever. Of course, we as a country only coined this after the parliamentary expenses scandal in 2009 where it was discovered it shockingly turned out with no oversight on the public purse that people can, will, and did dip their hands into it freely and often. So in 2009 IPSA, the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority was created to administer MP's pay. And as was well forever and ever...

...until they just announced that MPs will be privy to an 11% pay rise. Woo!

Okay. That 2009 expenses scandal wasn't that long ago, and it's still fresh in people's minds as every know and again somebody claims something silly on expenses and the public gets all irritable at it. The public sector has been on an 1% frozen pay increase for a fair few years now, and will continue to be on it until at least 2016. And to top it all off, it has also been revealed that over half the people currently in poverty do actually have jobs. Really. It's almost like that whole "we're only in debt because of those jobless shirkers" mantra I've been hearing for ages in complete horse shit as it turns out that yes, the country has basically been suffering a colossal pay cut these last few years.

Could... could I get an 11% pay rise? I mean, Jesus, all I've ever been privy to is cost of living rises (which are weirdly enough always set below inflation) and those have never been in the ten's of percent. Look at me, writing a little blog on the internet. Do you think I've ever seen a pay rise in the ten's of percent? Ha!

My feet are cold because the heating's expensive.

I know how you feel, blanket dog.

The only good news thus far is that the current message is austerity and cutting costs, and there is no utter way any MP could accept this pay rise without looking like the biggest hypocrite and douche known to humanity. Unless your Sir Peter Bottomley, who thinks this pay rise is fine. And while I've put his name down here to display my dislike of that man, at least he's honest enough to say he wants the phat cash - as research from IPSA claim's that two thirds of MPs believe they're underpaid. Aw. Bless. So while many MPs are crawling out the woodwork to lament this pay rise, they've mostly be passing on the message discreetly about having more phat stacks, please.

I mean, seriously, what the fuck IPSA? Seriously? You ask a bunch of - for a lack of better term - employees if they want more money and because most of them said yes you shrug and went along with it? And then choose to go along with it hardcore? Really? Any normal work place would of had near enough 100% saying yes please, more wonga, the only reason it was as low as 66ish% is because you are taking to a group of people whom many of which are either independently wealthy or savvy enough to not ask for more money from the public coffers when the public are not cool with that. Probably because the public's feet are cold because they can't afford heating anymore.

11 fucking percent. 11 fucking percent! I'd kill a man for 11 bleedin' percent, which just goes to tell you how little I'm paid. Whilst Sir Peter Bottomley has been all for the pay rise, as least the defence seceraty Philip Hammond, has acknowedgely that asking the public sector to show pay restraint while not exercising it themselves is wrong. However there's been no leaders stepping forward to say clearly that their party will be turning the raise down, because many MPs want the pay raise, who have been seeing real wages fall admittedly - real wages triple the national average, but who's counting?

On the one hand, I want to sit here and attempt fairness by looking at MP's wages and debating the impact differing wages would have on social makeup. After all, the very reason a salary was introduced to MPs was to enable a more diverse Parliament, because before the only people who could afford to dedicate their time to serving in parliament were the rich, as everyone else had to get on with their day jobs, which at the time was probably something like blacksmithing, being a peasent or dragon fighting or something.

Dragon populations in Britain back then were much higher, with greater territories then today's Welsh and Scottish highlands. I'm alledgedly historian, trust me on this.

So I get that there's a point to the salary, a good point, even It's just that when people say a decreased salary will discourage middle class people from turning their hand at politics all I can say in response is good. If the (relative) low wage turns you off from serving the public, then clearly we don't want you serving the public in the first place. We'll pass it over to someone who cares about the public, not someone who's mostly concerned with the bottom line.

However if you are going to sell yourselves so completely and utterly on the notion of austerity, it is inconceivable to justify taking such a wage increase whilst simultaneously demanding that every one around you to tighten their belts. I will be monitoring, using the Freedom of Information Act is necessary, which MPs decide that the dough is too sweet to pass over. I will remember which of those that do.

Sigh. Maybe instead of bitching about politicians I should knuckle up and join them.

At least then I could put my heating bill on expenses and not have cold feet.