Proceeding contribution from Baroness May of Maidenhead (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 3 July 2008. It occurred during Debate on Members' Salaries.
Members' Salaries
I hoped that I had made it clear that I do not totally disagree with Sir John's proposals. I agree with the principles behind his proposals, and with the mechanism that he has proposed—namely, the review that should take place in the first year of a Parliament, followed by automatic annual increases in pay on the basis of some measure. I disagree with two aspects of his proposals. The first is the index that should be adopted. The second is the issue of the catch-up payments over the next three years. That is why I do not agree with those hon. Members who have tabled amendments seeking to delay the implementation of the principle of the Baker review while ensuring that we receive the full proposed increase, albeit at a later date. I believe that we should now take the decision to accept that it would not be right for the House of Commons to continue to vote on our pay, and I hope that that view is shared across the House. We should also accept that a sensible mechanism has been proposed, and I hope that that view is shared across the whole House as well. In recognition not only of the Government's present public sector pay stance but of our responsibility as Members of Parliament to send the right signals to our constituents about the approach that we are willing to take in recognition of the concerns that they have expressed about our pay and costs, it is right that we should not take the uprating that Sir John Baker has proposed through the catch-up payments over the next three years. When restraint is being encouraged for others by the Government, it is right that Members of Parliament should be willing to accept such restraint for ourselves and to say that we will not vote on our own pay in future. We should start that process off by showing, in this final vote, that we are willing to stand up and be counted and to exercise the restraint that we are encouraging in others. That is why I do not support the amendments that have been tabled today, and why I support the motion that sets out the Government's proposals on the index and the mechanism that are to be used.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 478 c1068
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 00:48:07 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_489698
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_489698
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_489698