What if our lawmakers lived by the same economic conditions they legislate?

"This House Would Replace MP Salaries with Universal Basic Income"

Step into one of the boldest debates of our time as we ask: Should Members of Parliament—at Westminster and in the devolved parliaments—receive a Universal Basic Income (UBI) instead of traditional salaries?

At its heart, this motion questions privilege, representation, and the principles of fairness. If UBI is truly viable for the people, shouldn't it be viable for their leaders? Should those who design economic systems be required to live within them?

🔥 In this provocative exchange:

• Proponents will argue that replacing MP salaries with UBI would bridge the gap between elected officials and the public, encourage genuine public service, and send a powerful message about equality and economic justice.

• Opponents will push back, warning of unintended consequences: weakened political diversity, compromised independence, and the danger of reducing public office to a luxury for the independently wealthy.

This motion doesn't just challenge political norms—it puts the values of leadership under the spotlight. Are MPs public servants or professionals? Should representation come with personal sacrifice?

Whether you're a policy wonk, a sceptic of career politics, or an advocate for economic reform, this is the debate that dares to ask: Should power come with pay—or principle?