This is not simply a question of whether voters like it or not. It is about whether private financial interests can influence the way MPs vote.
After all, if politicians have more than one paymaster, there is always a chance that their actions could be shaped by financial interests. Their true priorities will always be open to question.
More than a third of MPs have reported outside earnings since the start of the pandemic, but some jobs may have gone undeclared. In my 2016 book, ‘Parliament Ltd’, I found that 40% of company directorships held by politicians were not listed in the Register of Interests.
Too complicated?
Supporters of second jobs always say it would be far too difficult to ban them. But their arguments only serve to show how little this issue is considered by those in Westminster.
First they say that – if we want to ban second jobs – we need to pay MPs a ‘proper’ salary. In reality, their £81,932 pay is extremely good (the average UK income is about £30,000 a year). Plus, MPs who chair select committees get an extra £16,000, while ministers get much more.
But even if they were underpaid, this would still not justify lobbying, corruption or cronyism. We should not have to bribe our MPs with ever-higher salaries just to stop them from abusing our democracy.
The second argument you will hear is that it’s just too complicated to fix. This point has even been made by political journalists, saying that “the chances of reform actually happening diminish quickly” because of “tricky areas”.