Should MPs have second jobs? No.

Or, mostly no. This argument has raged on for years, back to the time when they weren’t paid as MPs and were dependent on independent wealth or income.

But over the centuries, the job has changed hugely. It is a combination of running a small business (your constituency workers and so forth), representing your constituency, and playing your part in arguing and forming policy in Parliament. If you are in government, then the job is more demanding still; an MP has an influential role when it comes to the dispensing of policy, not just making it.

The arguments in favour of MPs working tend to be on the spurious side. Let’s destroy a few.

“If MPs didn’t have second jobs, they would bring no experience to Parliament.”

The argument against this is the same as the one about appointing peers to the lords: whatever experience and knowledge they may have, most of the time they will be talking about issues they have no experience of at all.

You may appoint a scientist to the Lords, but they will not only vote on matters of science, but on education, immigration, industrial regulation, foreign policy, financial regulation…

In addition, most MPs have had jobs BEFORE they came to Parliament. A couple of younger ones have a limited experience in that way, but they are few.

And if you look at many of the jobs of State, very few MPs over the years have been qualified to do the job when it comes to experience. How many experienced economists with a qualification in global economics have headed the Treasury? How many doctors have run Health?

“Some MPs are natural writers and broadcasters — they should be able to use these talents.”

But they can without it being a job. They could write a blog on Medium. They could host a podcast on Spotify. If that is so important to them, then there are lots of unpaid outlets which wouldn’t then put pressure on their valuable time as an MP. They would make their own deadlines.

No one said an MP couldn’t have a hobby!

“We wouldn’t attract the best people.”

As Owen Jones said this morning on the BBC, the job of an MP is about serving, not earning money. If someone is only prepared to serve if they can still make a pile on the side, then I am a little worried about their idea of serving.

Historically, one of the reasons why MPs earn salaries as MPs is so that anyone from any background can “serve,” and not just those with private incomes. The argument then was that if you offer a financial carrot, you would get a good, varied lot applying that the electorate could then choose from. That argument still applies.

So, how many MPs have second jobs?

According to the BBC, around 200 have earnt something in 2020. But many of those were as little as £50. Others, however, earned huge amounts. Ministers are not allowed second jobs, but former ministers can do very well.

You cannot, as an MP, be a lobbyist. But until recently, you could earn as a political consultant — an extremely dodgy role that can lead to a kind of political “insider trading.”

Of the big earners, they tend to be mostly Conservative MPs. This is often because many Conservative MPs have a business background, probably owned something substantial, and that continues unless they are a minister. Only a few Labour MPs are big earners. David Lammy does well, I gather.

There is an element of “jealousy” in the current argument with some being annoyed not that another MP is earning, but how much they are earning.

But mostly, this should be about time. Whether you are working for pennies, or are being paid thousands for a half-hour speech, or your news programme, does an MP really have time for this?

The answer should be definitely not. And if they do, then, perhaps they are not doing enough as an MP. Perhaps we should be finding them more to do either in Parliament or locally.

A blanket ban, then.

Possibly not. It might not be practical. But perhaps broaden the restrictions:

Stop them working for external media companies or broadcasters.
No consultancy work.
No sitting on company boards.
Make them work a minimum number of hours as an MP.
No paid speaking engagements.
No work outside of the UK.
A cap on how much they can charge/earn.

Lastly, nothing that conflicts with any special interests within Parliament — like sitting on committees, being part of particular research or policy groups etc.

That one might seem mean if, for instance, it was a special interest that made a person stand as an MP in the first place. But remember we are talking PAID jobs here in the private sector.

You cannot have someone who is sitting on various defence related committees and groups, or being friendly with people in defence, then working for a company with defence interests.

Time is important

How much time is spent as an MP is important. The best MPs, those who have a reputation for serving their constituents best and contributing most, don’t have second jobs, or spend very little time at them. They come from all parties, so this isn’t really a party issue.

MPs have a decent salary, paid for by the voter. The voter is entitled to demand that MPs’ focus is resolutely on the job 100% of the time and not on the side earnings.

MPs, like all other humans, are distracted easily. We should limit the possibilities of those distractions.