Jimmy Cayne, the cigar-chomping, bridge & golf loving boss of Bear Sterns, had a pay packet of $34m last year.

The US bank, which was worth $140bn last summer, has just been bought by JP Morgan for $236m in a desperate rescue mission.

British MPs are getting a lot of stick right now for their remuneration. By my rough calculation you could employ 300 of them for the price of one Mr Cayne (pictured below).

That isn’t going to avert the mother of all rows, however, when MPs’ pay comes to a head in July.

We revealed in Saturday’s paper that members may be asked to vote on a 50 per cent pay rise which would take their salaries to £94,000 in return for foresaking their expenses.

In case you missed the story, here it is.

The Commons register of interests is often worth a scan. Here are some bits and bobs from this week’s update.

David Cameron, leader of the Conservative party

(amongst other things)

Gift of a Fortnum and Mason hamper and twelve silver goblets from Lord Harris of Peckham and Lady Harris. (Registered 10 January 2008)

Gift of Fortnum and Mason hampers from Mr Mohammed Galadari of London. (Registered 10 January 2008)

Gift of a Harrods hamper from the Sultan of Brunei. (Registered 10 January 2008)

Richard Caborn, former sports minister

  (new jobs)  

Consultant to AMEC; construction in the nuclear industry. (£70,001-£75,000)

Consultant to Fitness Industry Association; trade association for fitness industry. (£10,001-£15,000)

Chairman of the Football, Social and Economic Forum, which reports to the Association of European professional Football Leagues, the co-ordinating body of European professional football leagues. (Up to £5,000)

Derek Conway (MP for Old Bexley and Sidcup, formerly Conservative) 

Nil

Is Tony Blair the ideal candidate to halt climate change?

He is already whizzing around the world for his work at JP Morgan, Zurich Financial Services and through his role as Middle East peace envoy.

Perhaps he could do his bit to save the planet by staying at home - after a decade zizagging the world as prime minister.

It doesn’t look likely.

To quote from this morning’s Guardian: “He is due to reveal the initiative this weekend at a meeting of the G20 in Japan, before travelling to discuss the plans with the Chinese and Indian governments.”

Expect some over-excited coverage of MPs “John Lewis list” which tells them how much they can spend kitting out their London homes.

The list was published by the Commons’ authorities today under a freedom of information request by Press Association.

The cost of the stuff in question - beds, new kitchens, rugs, dining tables - is not exactly surprising. The prices are the same as you would see at, er, John Lewis.

For an excellent take on the whole “scandal”, it’s worth reading Daniel Finkelstein at The Times.

What is more controversial is the extent of the objects which MPs can claim via their additional cost allowance.

A £10,000 kitchen doesn’t sound expensive to me (I can say that from bitter experience) but why should taxpayers be paying for this in the first place? Or TVs, or dining tables, or £300 rugs?

This state of affairs came about years ago when the allowance was set up to prevent public criticism of an outright pay rise. Unfortunately the opposite has happened.

A committee chaired by Michael Martin, the speaker, will report this summer and is likely to recommend scrapping the allowance and rolling up the £21,110 into MPs’ salaries. This could be unpopular with the public as it looks like a big pay increase. But it’s not before time.

In the meantime, the real story will be when MPs are forced to disclose how they have spent their allowances - in a few days’ time - thanks to a recent decision by the information commissioner. (Unless the House appeals against it, which seems likely).

That will be far more interesting than the theoretical list of what they may or may not have spent. Here, for the record, are highlights from the John Lewis list:

Air conditioning unit: £299.99

Bed: £1,000

Bookcase/cabinet: £500

Coffee maker/machine: £100

Coffee table: £250

Dining arm chairs: £150 each

Dining table: £600

Food mixer: £200

Free-standing mirror: £300.00

Fridge/freezer combi: £550

Gas cooker: £650

Hi Fi/stereo: £750

Installation of new bathroom: £6,335

Installation of new kitchen: £10,000

Recordable DVD: £270

Suite of furniture: £2,000

Television set: £750

Wardrobe: £700

Political gamblers appear to be unimpressed with Gordon Brown. They believe the likelihood of the prime minister winning the most seats at the next election has never been lower — in spite of improved Labour polls, a makeover at Downing Street, a budget and an apparent conversion to Blairite reform.

Take a look at this graph showing the odds on Labour winning the most seats at the next general election. The data is from Betfair, the online betting exchange (think of a stock market rather than a bookie offering odds), covering a period of about three years in a market worth about £600,000.

Here is a quick run through of the Labour peaks and troughs since 2005. After the 2005 election victory, the betting market settled on there being a 65 per cent chance they would win the most seats at the next election.

This fell to under 40 per cent at the height of Tony Blair’s unpopularity.

Labour’s prospects steadily improved after he announced he would leave in a year, rising to 60 per cent as Mr Brown became prime minister. His honeymoon and the snap-election speculation pushed his chances of winning the most seats to a remarkable 75 per cent.

This plummeted back towards 40 per cent after the non-election, the data loss and the donations scandal.

What is interesting is that this has stayed about the same since the end of last year. The great relaunch has apparently had no effect on the opinions of those gambling on his prospects.

So what are the punters telling us?

First, that Mr Brown is caught in a rut. He has more chance of beating David Cameron than Tony Blair at his most unpopular. But not much more.

Second, that the Tories have hit a ceiling (see the graph on the left showing the Tory chances of winning the most seats). There is about a 55 per cent chance that the Tories will win the most seats. But they had a better chance of beating Tony Blair.

In sum, we have hit a political impasse. Very little seems to move the odds. Tracking how punters are wagering their money is a good alternative to watching political polls, as it offers a longer term perspective, rather than a snapshot of opinion.

The lesson is that while the polls are moving towards Labour, the betting man still thinks the Tories will prevail.

Of all the people to fall foul of, Tory MP Bob Spink ended up with Bill Sharp, who is 6ft 5in and weighs 18 stone. Sharp is deputy chairman of Spink’s local Tory association at Castle Point, Essex.

It is the personal enmity between these two men which lies behind the departure of Spink from the Tory party today.

Patrick McLoughlin, chief whip, implies that he withdrew the whip from Spink. The MP says this is “brass-necked dishonesty” and “low-political deceit” and that he resigned.

Frankly, who cares whose idea it was for the former management consultant to quit the Tories?

Much more interesting is the bad blood behind the row.

Sharp was an ally of Spink and helped him win his seat at the last election. But the Mail on Sunday claimed three years ago that Mr Spink had a relationship with Gail Boland, former partner of Mr Sharp.

Relations between the two men went from bad to worse and at one point the pair ended up in a court battle.

Mr Sharp was not answering his phone this evening.  Spink told the FT today that his relationship with Ms Boland had nothing to do with the row.

In 2005 he issued a statement saying: “I categorically deny having any sexual relationship with Gail Boland prior to the end of either my marriage or her relationship with Bill Sharp.”

The 59-year old was first elected in 1992, lost his seat in 1997 and returned in 2001. He quit the party ahead of an attempt by his association - not for the first time - to deselect him.

Spink had urged the Conservative party to investigate the management of the association but the party’s year-long inquiry was inconclusive. Today he said he was angry not to have had enough support from Tory central office.

Spink’s last appearance in the news was when it emerged that he had been paying not only his ex-wife but also Ashleigh Sharp - the teenage daughter of Gail Boland and Bill Sharp - to work as his researcher. There was no suggestion of any wrongdoing.

The word from Tory HQ last night, incidentally, was that few tears were being shed for the departure of Spink, whose interests include pottery and marathon running.

What to make of Alistair Darling and his sunny forecasts? It takes an exceptional orator to combine such dour delivery with such optimistic content.

Last time I looked, the stock market had collapsed by about 15 per cent, house prices had fallen four months in a row and mortgage applications had slumped.

But the Chancellor of the Exchequer still takes a rose-tinted view of how things are going. To hear him in his first Budget today, it was almost as if he was discussing another country; and I don’t mean Scotland.

“Uniquely placed to succeed in the global economy,” he droned. “Better placed than any other global economy….pre-eminent world financial centre…”

You could be forgiven for thinking that Great Britain was a fortress and every other country - in the US, Europe, Asia - were mere sandcastles, reduced to nothing by a few sub-prime waves.

Page 149 of the Red Book has more of this: “Box 4: Resilience of the UK economy” describes the ”improved resilience” of Britain and how it survived the Asian crisis of 1997, the Russian debt crisis of 1998, the terrorist attacks of 9/11, etc (all of which happened to other countries).

“The UK (was) estimated to have been the most resilient of the economies studied in the latter period (of 1994-2005),” it said.

Mocking Mr Darling’s confidence may be dangerous, given that the Treasury has beaten most economic forecasters since Labour came to power in 1997.

 But why the apparent complacency about the UK housing market, where plenty of “sub-prime” lending has been going on unchecked in recent years?

Another weighty document published today by the Treasury - “Housing Finance Review: analysis and proposals” - makes for a rather serious read. Though lacking in sensationalism, it spells out the consequences of the credit crunch for Britain’s mortgage market. Answer: very bad.

Page 61 has an illuminating chart which shows typical lending rates in different countries around the world. Loan to value ratios range from 55 per cent in Italy, 67 per cent in France and 65 per cent in Canada to - at the most extreme - 80 per cent in two countries.

Can you guess which?

 The US (where falling house prices have sparked a global panic). And the UK.

 The small print of the Red Book does have a few signals about what the government really thinks. It expects revenues from stamp duty, capital gains and inheritance tax all in the next financial year, partly thanks to “sluggish or flat house price growth”. The fact that it is lifting its borrowing targets is another clue.

Here is are some snippets from the budget documents. I’ll start with the bad news.

- Falling share prices will hit capital gains receipts in 2009 by an undisclosed amount. Inheritance tax receipts are also likely to be “adversely effected”

- Stamp duties are expected to be £800m below forecast because of weakness in the housing sector. In 2008-09, receipts are expected to fall by 6 per cent as the country goes through a period of “sluggish or flat house price growth”

- They expect a further “near-term” decline in commercial property prices (which have already fallen by more than 10 per cent in the last year)

- Investment in homebuilding is expected to be flat in 2008

- The Treasury are able to write an entire box on Financial Sector Performance without once mentioning Northern Rock

And here’s the good news (if you believe the Treasury)

- The budget forecasts are based on the assumption that the credit squeeze will ease in the second half of this year and “normalise” by the middle of 2009

- Don’t panic, there is a rebound coming: “With the economy picking up in 2009 as financial markets normalise, a rebound in residential transactions and an upturn in commercial property is projected.”

- And who said falling property prices would hit consumption? “Strong recent labour market performance means that conditions are in place for house prices to slow without a significant negative impact on consumption.”

This blog suggested last Friday that Labour was increasingly worried about Boris Johnson’s campaign to be mayor of London.

And now the blonde motormouth is ahead: at least, according to the betting odds.

When I spoke to William Hill last night, Boris and Ken Livingstone were both at 5/6.

This morning that had shifted. Boris is now 8/11 and Ken is evens.

My colleague Alex Barker, an amateur bookie, found this chart (above) on Betfair, showing Boris’s odds shortening. 

The latest shift in his favour could have something to do with the Evening Standard’s revelations last night about emails between Lee Jasper, Ken’s race advisor, and the female head of an organisation which received funding from the GLA.

Some of the best lines from the emails were cut out of the FT’s piece this morning, probably for reasons of space. This is my favourite: “I want to wisk (sic) you away to a deserted island beach, honey glase (sic) you, let you cook slowly before a torrid and passionate embrace.”

The recipient of the emails denies any impropriety. 

Plenty of FT readers have second homes in the countryside. So I feel it’s my duty to shed some light on two big news stories of the last couple of days which would in theory affect them.

 1] A Sunday newspaper has suggested that the government is planning a crackdown on second home owners in rural parts. It based its story on a report by Matthew Taylor, Lib Dem MP, which has not yet been written.

Mr Taylor’s comment yesterday was:

“The report is totally inaccuarate…I have reached no conclusions on second homes being subject to planning controls, and won’t even report until July. I have been asked to look at the findings of the 2006 commission on affordable rural homes, and this was one of around 100 suggestions they made - so it forms a small part of my enquiry, but it is very early days and absolutely no conclusions have been reached, let alone reported to Government”.

 2] Stuart Burgess, the government’s “rural advocate”, has warned that the imminent cut in capital gains tax on second homes - from 40 per cent to 18 per cent - will make it even harder for first-time buyers and young families to get on the housing ladder. This is a genuine concern in places such as Cornwall and the Lake District.

The only flaw in Mr Burgess’s argument is that the changes to the CGT regime are not necessarily the tax cut that they seem.

Until now, the seller of a second home does not pay the entire uplift in its value. This is because you can apply “indexation” - which takes inflation into account - into your calculations.

From April you will only be able to use indexation up to 1998. As a result, some owners will pay less tax than before; others will pay more. Another of the government’s neat little sleights of hand.