Rejected petition Consider occupational pension forfeiture for errant Members of Parliament.

MPs, convicted of an offence committed in connection with office or guilty of behaviour likely to be gravely injurious to our interests or liable to lead to serious loss of confidence in our Parliamentary system, should have their occupational pensions partially or completely forfeited.

More details

Many office holders in public service have standards of service imposed on them which carry a wide range of punitive measures in the event of transgression. In particular, the police service and the military hold employees to account to the extent an employee may lose part of, or all off, permanently or temporarily, their occupational pension. The matter of Keith Vaz demonstrates, clearly, that if someone isn't suitable to receive a public wage, why should they receive a full public pension?

This petition was rejected

Why was this petition rejected?

It’s about something that the UK Government or Parliament is not directly responsible for.

The Government and Parliament don’t have the power to set MPs’ pensions. That power was given by Parliament to the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) in 2010, so that after 2012 MPs no longer had control over their own pensions.

If you would like to contact IPSA about MPs' pensions, here’s how to contact them:

http://parliamentarystandards.org.uk/About%20Us/Pages/Contact-Us.aspx

We only reject petitions that don’t meet the petition standards.

Date submitted 6 September 2016
Get petition data (json format)

About petition data

The data shows the number of people who have signed the petition by country as well as in the constituency of each Member of Parliament. This data is available for all petitions on the site. It is not a list of people who have signed the petition. The only name that is shared on the site is that of the petition creator.