David Cameron rejected Labour's call for a cap on MPs' outside earnings and a ban on directorships and consultancies as it emerged that some MPs made hundreds of thousands of pounds last year.
Former Prime Minister Gordon Brown entered payments on the Commons Register of Members' Financial Interests of £962,516 in 2014.
The Labour MP also stated, however, that he does not receive any of the money personally and that it is held by the Office of Gordon and Sarah Brown, the organisation he set up after leaving Downing Street to support his public work.
The register shows that a number of MPs earned significantly more than the Prime MInister - whose salary is £142,000 - last year.
According to the register of interests for 2104, Geoffrey Cox, a Conservative MP and barrister, made more than £820,000.
Other high earners on the list include the outspoken Bradford MP George Galloway who listed £277,350 on the register in earnings last year.
David Blunkett, the former Labour Home Secretary, made £176,295, of which he gave £1,500 to charity.
Other top earners included Sir Nicholas Soames, Winston Churchill's grandson, who registered more than £240,000 between January and December 2014.
Labour leader Ed Miliband has written to Mr Cameron urging the Prime Minister to follow his lead in banning Labour MPs from directorships and consultancies.
Mr Miliband also said that he was consulting on a cap which could see MPs' outside income limited to just between £5,000 and £15,000 a year.
No 10 said that Mr Cameron's previously expressed opposition to a ban on outside jobs had not changed, despite the latest figures.
But Downing Street said that the Conservative leader did believe that there should be more openness around which MPs earn what outside parliament.
The Prime Minister's official spokesman said: "As he has said before he doesn't take the view that a chamber that is simply full of professional politicians with no outside experience is a good thing.
"But, as he has said before, of course, there need to be proper rules around transparency and disclosure."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article