 Perhaps more shocking than the rules that were broken by Owen Patterson with the rules that weren't Patterson you remember broke lobbying rules because he arranged governmental meetings for people who paid him But my initial reaction to this story was why was he getting paid by external private companies in the first place? Like all MPs Owen Patterson already had a well-paid job MPs make 82,000 pounds a year that puts them in the UK's top five percent of earners Being an MP should also keep anyone fairly busy diligent MPs report working upwards of 60 hours a week contributing to debates Drafting written questions and representing constituents So why did anyone think it was acceptable for someone such as Owen Patterson to have two external jobs which gave him obligations to provide time to these these private corporations instead of his constituents and which paid him an extra 112,000 pounds per year dwarfing the already handsome some He got for his what's supposed to be at least his main job Of course on this front Owen Patterson was not alone to get an idea of some other MPs who couldn't bear to live on 80,000 pounds a year These are some of Patterson's standout peers Andrew Mitchell is a former chief whip now a backbench Tory MP in 2020 on top of Mitchell's MP salary He earned an extra 240,000 pounds. This included 30,000 pounds for five days work with the accountancy firm Ernst and Young and 50,000 pounds plus shares and options for eight days at Equinox International Holdings Limited a private equity and adventure capital firm One wonders if those eight days work can really justify 50,000 pounds Or if the private equity firm sees other benefits to having an MP on their payroll Next up is Fiona Bruce another conservative. She earns a hundred and eighty thousand pounds on top of her MP salary Bruce practices law through her own firm in 2020 six separate consulting jobs and her the equivalent of up to 11,487 pounds per hour We can also show you Richard Fuller. He earned a hundred and seventy five thousand pounds in 2020 that was for committing two hours per month to a number of director ships and chairmen ships including a brand Protection firm a software company and a venture capital firm This is a man with his fingers in many lucrative pies Finally, we've got Sajid Javid someone I'm sure you will recognize before being appointed health secretary this year But after holding the position of Chancellor Javid bagged a job with JP Morgan, which paid him a hundred and fifty thousand pounds a year To receive that some Javid worked six to eight hours per month meaning the role paid at least 1,875 pounds per hour We should note that unlike Owen Patterson, none of the MPs mentioned here have been found to have broken any Lobbying rules, but you've got to wonder why these firms would pay MPs so much money for working just a few Hours a month. Even these are exceptionally productive people some of the most productive people in the world worth a thousand 1,800 pound a month or they aren't just being employed For their labor power. Ash, why does anyone think this is acceptable? Why is this normal that we have MPs whose side jobs pay them more than their main job? Because the people who would be trusted to fix this are the ones who benefit financially from this arrangement I think that an awful lot of MPs Don't see a conflict between representing their constituents You know being entrusted with our democracy and being paid to effectively be the voice of capital or particular Corporations while they are in Parliament and that's something which is really really wrong The simplest way to get rid of this would be to impose just a blanket ban on MPs having Second jobs while they are in fact MPs you could obviously make certain exemptions For example, if you are an MP and a local councillor at the same time something like that You know, there are ways to do this where it's reasonable But it's perfectly obvious to me that if what you're doing is six to eight hours work a month that you're being paid 150,000 pounds what you're being remunerated for is not the actual work you're doing it's being an MP with you know prospects you can you know one day Get back a cabinet post and that's worth investing in if you're an organisation like JP Morgan or you know Ernst & Young or a venture capital firm or whoever else you're paying for influence Even if you're more subtle And that's egregious a rule breaker than own Patterson You are still effectively a shill for a corporation while you should be doing your job representing your constituents What justifies it so some people say oh 80,000 pounds isn't enough as I've said That does put you in the top 5% of earners in Britain. So if you don't think that's enough you should probably You know be you're the lawmakers Maybe you could increase people's wages if you don't think 80,000 pounds is enough to live on you could increase everyone else's wages I mean, some people think 80,000 pounds isn't enough though Tory MP Peter bottom Lee wrote an article on Thursday headlined To prevent another scandal pay MPs more This follows a recent interview in the evening standard where the same theme was raised in that piece We discovered that Sir Peter who has been in the common since 1975 and is its longest serving MP said he is currently not struggling financially But he believes the situation is desperate for newer colleagues. He added. I don't know how they manage It's really grim Remember as I keep saying the incomes. He is described during the top 5% of British salaries If you think that is grim then can you please change some laws because how do you think it is like to live on? You know 20 grand or the median wage was about 27. No, this is this doesn't stand up That was bottom Lee's argument for higher pay Yet even if MPs did get that pay rise he still doesn't think that should preclude them taking other well-paid jobs This isn't one of those arguments where people say we should ban second jobs But that means we'll have to raise their salary. No, he wants both second jobs and get paid more So this was his argument for why they should be allowed to have second jobs This was in the Times article the headline of which I just showed you so he writes to those who say no outside earnings I asked whether Michael Foote should have refused his book royalties or put down his pen While he was an MP Peter Fernum was a redundant engineer He used his payoff to buy machine tools and created a thriving metal-forming business It would have been over the top to disqualify him from the commons unless he's sold up So those are the two examples of MPs having second jobs or second sources of income that Peter bottom Lee thinks are most persuasive as to why they shouldn't be banned Personally, I think Michael Foote could have donated those royalties to charity and sorry Peter It doesn't seem to me that one successful steel foam is good enough reason to risk the corruption of our entire parliamentary system Look, it's a really cynical pair of examples to use which is somebody on the left who's written a book and you know somebody who is Has got proximity to manual labor. That's plainly not what we're seeing with, you know, the 72 landlords Who voted against the law which would have made homes Fit for human habitation That's not what we're seeing with Saja Javid earning hundreds of thousands of pounds from a giant global bank That's certainly not what we were seeing with own Patterson either But again, if you wanted to you know, just have a blunt instrument of a law and wipe out second jobs entirely do it Do it the loss that I think that you would get from people who maybe have sources of income Which aren't so egregiously exploitative or corrosive to our democracy for instance Rosina Alan Khan who is still a practicing doctor I Think is more than made up for by what you gain in MPs Who aren't either formally or informally being paid to be lobbyists for a private corporation There's all these these good deeds that MPs could do He wouldn't want to stop them doing that and going out in society and you know helping people in a hospital or whatever Well, if that's their real motivation if their real motivation is to contribute to society Maybe any income could go to some members of Parliament charitable trust which goes to some, you know Charity that everyone agrees is a good thing birds. Maybe RSPB or something something that everyone on all sides of the house can agree It's fine. It goes to that or the National Lottery something like that Not even the NSPCC Michael, you were like, you know what? I think parliamentarians They're a bit split on abused children The past decade would show that there are many Tory MPs who are happy to punish kids So, I mean, that is true. I haven't seen them punish birds So I I would place money on the RSPB being the one that gets the least complaints I don't know you say you say you've not seen them punish birds But Richard Drax who was one of the Tory MPs who was being investigated by the standards committee and voted to scrap it He had failed to declare his I think 150 acre or something grouse more land So he basically maintains a spread of land in Yorkshire, which is used solely for hunting really stupid and defenseless birds So, I don't know