Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Harman (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 3 July 2008. It occurred during Debate on Members' Salaries.


Members' Salaries

We take the view that the recommendation is not consistent with the Government's pay policy and approach to public sector pay. Later, I will set out our approach to the current position. I have tabled a series of motions, which will allow the House to vote for Sir John's proposal for a comparator or for the Government's proposal. They will allow hon. Members to vote separately on whether to accept or reject the three £650 catch-ups. Sir John Baker's comparator proposal is opinion motion No. 1, the Government's proposal is opinion motion No. 2, and Sir John Baker's £650 catch-ups is opinion motion No. 3. Both the opinion motions on Sir John's proposal and the Government's proposal provide for arrangements for future, independent reviews of hon. Members' pay. Both the Baker and the Government motions provide that: the SSRB should remain the independent body, which conducts reviews of hon. Members' pay; those reviews should occur once in each Parliament, and that the outcome of those reviews should be implemented without the need for further debates or votes in the House. In both opinion motions, those arrangements are set out in paragraphs 2 and 3. Whether the House chooses the Baker or the Government proposals, that should be the last time we have such a debate or vote in this House.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
478 c1062 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Allowances Pay Members Business expenses
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk