States head for a pay rise

STATES Members yesterday paved the way for their pay rise to go ahead despite hundreds of Islanders facing an uncertain employment future and tough economic times.

01442108_Cropped

STATES Members yesterday paved the way for their pay rise to go ahead despite hundreds of Islanders facing an uncertain employment future and tough economic times.

In a repeat of events in 2010 when a similar proposal for a pay freeze the following year was blocked, the States yesterday voted 31-16 not to lift the rules that stop Members discussing matters in which they have a financial interest.

As a result, St Saviour Constable Sadie Rennard's proposition that Members should not receive a £818 pay rise as proposed by the independent panel that sets their pay, could not be considered.

Instead, the pay rise - which equates to 1.8 per cent - automatically comes into effect.

Comments for: "States head for a pay rise"

Old Crappo

with people left, right and centre losing their jobs, companies going to the wall and those people that are lucky enough to still have a job not having had any pay rises for several years or may be even taking pay cuts in order to keep their jobs it's good to see that the great and the good in the "Big House" are in touch with what is happening to the majority of us mere mortals!.

It really goes to prove that most of our states members have no idea of what is going on in the real world but then again the majority of them would be unemployable in the real world anyway.

The majority of the states members will all no doubt hide behind the excuse that their pay is set by an independent panel and further goes to show that again few of them have any guts to do what is right!

Derchas

I agree with Old Crappo. This is nothing short of disgusting.

Taxpayer

Remember them next election, especially Deputy Southern who said quote :- "My advice to them [fellow States Members] would be, look at your conscience and if you think that you are worth it, take it. I think I'm worth it."

Senator Philip Francis Cyril Ozouf

Senator Alan Breckon Contre

Senator Lyndon John Farnham

Senator Sir Philip Martin Bailhache

Connétable Alan Simon Crowcroft

Connétable John Le Sueur Gallichan

Connétable Daniel Joseph Murphy

Connétable Leonard Norman

Connétable John Martin Refault

Connétable Deidre Wendy Mezbourian

Connétable Juliette Gallichan

Connétable Michael John Paddock

Connétable Stephen William Pallett

Deputy Robert Charles Duhamel

Deputy Geoffrey Peter Southern

Deputy Anne Enid Pryke

Deputy Sean Power

Deputy Shona Pitman

Deputy Montfort Tadier

Deputy Trevor Mark Pitman

Deputy Edward James Noel

Deputy Michael Roderick Higgins

Deputy Andrew Kenneth Francis Green M.B.E.

Deputy Jeremy Martin Maçon Contre

Deputy Gerard Clifford Lemmens Baudains

Deputy John Hilary Young

Deputy Susan Jane Pinel

Deputy John Michael Le Bailly

Deputy Stephen George Luce

Deputy Roderick Gordon Bryans

Deputy Kristina Louise Moore

Jerry Gosselin

By simply listing the States Members who voted against lifting Standing Order 106, you are approaching this in completely the wrong way because the implication is that the others who voted to lift the Standing Order are blameless- but they are not! Then what about the others who left the Chamber before the appel (Deputies Lewis and Baker) or who took a convenient sickie (Senator Ferguson and Deputy Martin), thus avoiding the possibility of ending up on your blacklist?

I listened to the (very brief) debate and it was clear that some of those who wanted the matter debated had NO INTENTION of supporting Constable Rennard's proposition anyway. Had it been debated, I very much doubt she would have got more than two or three votes in her favour because many would have abstained or followed Lewis and Baker out into the tearoom to avoid adverse publicity. The truth is that there is no political dividing line in the House when it comes to improving their own pay and conditions- they will always pull together and do what's best for them as a whole, even if many of them will pretend otherwise when being interviewed by the media.

Jerry Gosselin

"... despite hundreds of islanders facing an uncertain employment future and tough economic times." - More like THOUSANDS!

It will be interesting to see what happens when proposals to introduce a private pension scheme for States Members and a system of differential pay (higher salaries for Ministers etc.) get lodged later this year. Will States Members still be so extremely reluctant to debate their own pay and conditions? I think we all know what the answer to this one is.

Sensible

I can actually see the thinking behind this, rather than headline lynching:

They put in a method which a separate independent body reviews their pay, and enacted rules which says they cannot vote or discuss matters which they have a financial interest in...all well and good so far.

Said body says that members pay should increase by 1.8%...some members do not agree and want a discussion\vote but the previous rule says they cannot discuss this as they have a financial interest.

For, in my view, the greater good the members vote not to repeal the rule concerning financial interests....So they are left to abide by the recommended 1.8% increase.

Now, I don't think they should get a rise but its actually not the members fault (this time!). They have to abide by the rules. They could, and maybe should, give any rise to charity though, which would be the sensible thing to do in my view.

James Wiley

Is the 'independent' body which is paid for by the States of Jersey and appointed by the States of Jersey.

The 'independent' body who are therefore totally dependent on the goodwill of the States Members for their place on the gravy train?

Jerry Gosselin

Yes, James. Furthermore, if States Members weren't happy with the work of the SMRRB, they would not have kept re-appointing the same loyal individuals back onto the Board like they have. If the SMRRB was not doing what the politicians wanted, it would either be scrapped or new, more reliable people "of repute" (in other words, not you or I) would be appointed. To call this Board independent is a laugh. The politicians only created it in the first place so that they had a convenient method of avoiding the flack every time they got a pay rise.

Scrutineer

Perhaps this independent body should be elected, but with a prerequisite that certain qualifications are required to stand. There is a need for some degree of science to go into it. Examples might be that one person must be an accountant, another a lawyer, and another must have an economics degree. Clearly, no one on the board must ever have stood for the States, and would be barred from doing so in the future.

I confess that I do find it a little strange that all States members are paid the same, particularly when those without ministers jobs have a lot of spare time, unless they manage to find ways of filling up their diaries by getting involved in very parochial issues (well, this is what a couple of ex-states members tell me). Some constables are an exception, of course, with a large parish to run.

Dave

What a disgrace,wish I could vote on getting a pay rise,I'm sorry to say this,but you are all a joke in the states,and you run this inland(in to the ground)shame on you all.£15-73 a week pay rise for doing and then free parking ,free food,and your little jollies you have in hotels and restaurants that you don't pay for( we do that for you) SHAME ON YOU

Desperado

In any other world this would not be allowed to happen! How can these people be awarded any increase in salary when they are so inept?

We the tax payers employ states members and as we have had no increases over the past several years it's just common sense that they should not have any increase either.

The treasury continue to ignore the tax payer. 20% means 20%, GST, increases in duty coupled with increases from Jersey Electricity and Jersey Gas makes the cost of simply living near on impossible.

I cannot tolerate injustices and I see this as a huge injustice.

We cannot allow this to happen!!!!

Claire

It is completely wrong for politicans to set their own pay. Why does thr Constable of St Saviour think it is right to ignore the Independant Panel, that any of us could have applied to join?

The correct decision was made.

CC

My boss determines if I get a pay rise or not. Being as they are employed by us, the taxpayers, surely we should all vote on whether or not we think they deserve a pay rise or not....I vote no.

James

It is fundamental that the Members do not discuss their own pay. Having an Independent Panel is hugely important and those who sought to undermine their recommendations because they were worried about how it might look need to think this through more seriously. Save us from short term populists please - the remuneration payable to existing elected Members of our government, and as importantly, to be paid to prospective Members of the future, must be set by a fair process.

Independance

Independent panel! Who do you think appoints the panel?

Sam

It's wrong for them to get a rise, but it was equally as wrong for Rennard to suggest the States could have a vote on it. It should be independent, but it's just a shame they independently decided a rise.

Just remember, if the States had voted against the rise yesterday, they could vote against a cut tomorrow. They should just have no say at all.

And anyway, most States Members have said they won't take it, and some that are taking it have said they're giving it to charity. So it's not as if a huge injustice is set to happen anyway.

Jerry Gosselin

A cut? No chance of that ever happening with the current SMRRB. The worst thing that could happen is that they don't recommend a pay rise for a given year. However, whilst doing that, they will also be planning to introduce other enhancements to the overall remuneration package to compensate... like getting the taxpayer to contribute to States Members' private pensions for example. ;-)

the thin wallet

another insult to the ordinary working person.

jerseythepartiesover

I can only concur with all those who will comment on here with regards how foolish and selfish and out of touch our current group of politicians are with the real world.

Problem that we all have at the next elections is who do we want to stay in this ramshackle discredited parliement.

I personally am struggling to work it if any off them should be relected.

I full root and branch removal of almost all of them I think is required including the Bailiff and the Dean.

Bo

Sets a president now for the unions when fighting for its civil servant members, what joy to receive more money soon!!!!!!

Franklin D. Roosevelt

@Bo

I believe the correct term is 'sets a precedent'...

observer

all I can say is one rule for them and one for everyone else... way to set an example!

Mogit

Now we really know what the States think about the voting public - the expression is "i'm alright jack".

Sanity

Would gladly pay ten times the salary if that would guarantee a more competent government. We would actually save money based on not having to have so many civil servants to fill the intellectual void. The most ironic part of this is that it was the State’s member who has contributed the least to the good governance of the Island who bought the proposition – in fact this is the only proposition she has bought since she started taking £45k. To even compare herself to those members working 24/7 is disgraceful.

Certainly all those States members who do not put in any effort should not be taking the money and their ethic should be judged accordingly

Jerry Gosselin

How on earth would drastically increasing the pay of States Members possibly result in the need for less civil servants? The former are policy makers, the latter are responsible for implementing those policies. The two should never be confused other wise you could end up with civil servants using their office for their own political purposes (which might sometimes conflict with those of the Minister, who is supposed to represent us). Likewise, some power-crazy politicians would just love the opportunity to go back to the corrupt pre-1940 days of patronage, when some committees were themselves responsible for appointing junior departmental staff.

Mario

What B.S. no one works 24/7. If they did they would soon be driven mad/die.

The meaning of ethics has become so diluted over the last 40 years I would say most people haven't got a clue as to what it means.

Andy

These States Members don't have the Island to heart!They are detached from what is happening in this Island and quite simply these members need to be named and shamed if they take this pay increase so in the next elections they too can join the ranks of unemployed.It makes me laugh when you look at some of their facebook pages stating all the work etc they are doing even at weekends...nobody makes these people stand for the States but obviuosly the incentive of £46000 is quite tempting!!

St Ouen

Shame on you!

Sanity

Old Crappo – you list all the reason why we should be paying more. Us “mortals” have not received a pay rise but those less intellectually challenged who make a success of their lives continue to rake it in.

Who do we want to plan and govern our future? Those that never made it, the business failures and the unemployable who understand our “hardships”? We already have a lot these in our Government who have proved just as incompetent at spending a billion and a half of our money as they were their own. Or do we want the successful entrepreneur capable of rebuilding our economy and delivering the economic conditions required for a stable and prosperous community?

You get back only what you pay for in life.

Mario

Present day capitalism is not conducive with a stable and prosperous community. This is the majority are in a mess.

roombay42

Socialism, the system where people are put to welfare slavery, is no better. Rulers of all persuasion wish only to advance their own selves, particularly at the expense of the ordinary working man/woman.

Self interest prevails.

Mario

Indeed but you still get tw@ts voting for these sort of self serving individuals thinking they are doing the right thing by doing so! They are dim and easily led.

C Le Verdic

Well, they are not 'greedy' trade unionists so that should make it acceptable to the pro establishment Jersey taxpayers.

Mario

Of cause it should especially since those that vote tend to be right wing Tory types.

INTERESTED BYSTANDER

Once again, with incredibly perfect timing, the powers that be have put their proverbial big foot in it ! How to win friends and influence people. This latest snub to the general populus of Jersy, will just lessen even more the confidence of our system of government. By what criteria have the 'indepenent'(?) panel figured that any one of the assembly has earned, or deserves a rise ? Surely it can't be for the careful spending, or the fantastic reserves made in finances during the past few years, or indeed, the high inflation rate !

Does anyone remember the days when States members were unpaid, and still turned up at every sitting, because it was a priviledge to serve the island ?

To coin a well known phrase, "You just can't make it up" !

Paul

Greedy so and so's..next elestion it's time to make you all redundant..Hope you choke on your undeserved rise while evreyone else loses out...

Sara

Totally agree with James and Sam this is another cheap attempt for the populist vote and to grab the headlines, the independent board was set up so that the states members have no say in their pay. Therefore it is right that they SHOULD NOT have any say.

How about the JEP finding out which states members actually do take the pay rise?

Rozel Aubin

Sadie is learning how the system works.

The rest of them already know how to work the system.

Sanity

Rozel Aubin – “Sadie is still learning the basics” She is taking £45k salary!!! For the last 18 months that is Seventy Thousand Pounds for doing NOTHING, not even bothering to learn such basics as how to ask a question. As she is the one claiming the moral high ground she should pay this back until she has moved beyond learning the “basics” and starts performing – don’t forget that it is those that she is slagging off that are doing her work whilst she is a home between States meetings. That is immoral.

Terry

And they still get paid less than bus drivers

Value for money

Seems reasonable. If only it were true.

Franklin D. Roosevelt

Terry, do you mean they work for less than £13 per hour?

Oh, sorry, I shouldn't have used the word "work" where some States Members are concerned...it upsets them.

Anyway, Deputy Southern is right, the 'good' States Members who know they have done their best should take this pay rise.

Refusing it is tantamount to saying "Pay rises are not necessary and we should all be happy with what we have"...

...and that, I'm afraid, is something only Jersey's 'wealthy' politicians can afford to say!

Net

And how would you know what bus drivers are on? The circa £40,000 TTS said they will be earning is at this time almost double what they will actually be getting with the new company God help those drivers with families and mortgages.

Sanity

Vote all these greedy so and so's out at the next election. Given that these are the best the current pay and conditions can attract we need to have a serious rethink. Imagine 50 Sadie Rennard’s controlling your future.

Sanity

Jerry – The former are supposed to be policy makers. Do you really think that the current make up are capable of making policy and controlling the highly paid and professional Civil Servants. You’re living in cuckoo land. If you want democratic representation you have to pay the price of dynamic and profession people capable of running a billion pound business. Meanwhile just continue to support the puppet politicians who understand the failed classes and let the professionals pull the strings. The intelligent rich will continue to get richer and the poor will continue to pay the price of their stupidly

James Wiley

I agree Sanity we should have far fewer, far better paid politicians of quality.

Unfortunately sensible people never get elected because the electorate are only interested in getting 'free stuff' and are not sane enough to realise that there is no such thing as 'free stuff'.

The only solution is to get rid of the States of Jersey entirely and we can all look after ourselves.

Mario

Quality? You'll have a long wait for one of those especially in the CoM.

Murphy

Whatever happened to "ruling by example" no pay rises for the States workers, Jersey hit by the worst recession ever, food prices extortinate, not helped by the 5% GST, electricity prices going through the roof, unemployment the highest it has ever been, and the people that are supposed to be in charge have their heads firmly in the sand, "I'm alright Jack pull up the ladder" comes to mind.

Andy

All these so called states members need to be named if they take the increase,decline,or so they say give it to charity..so many of these members are well off in their own right but still take every last penny they can!!

La Moye Squirrel

They should be showing a united front on this one. There are too many single voices and not enough unity. Once our politicians put the welfare of the Island and her people first and their pay second, we shall start to see improvements. Do we mere mortals who work in private enterprise vote for our salaries, not jolly likely! We are lucky to be told we get cost of living. Some people have not had a pay rise for two or three years. So long as we have I and me and not we and us we will continue to see this give to the rich and take from the poor. Age old story almost like the Lord of the Manor and the Serfs in Feudal times. Perhaps they should get paid in potatoes!

Kermit

Based on performance, they should get a pay cut ....

Southern, you are so worth it !!! NOT...

Mario

He's worth more than some I could mention! These would probably be the ones you have been voting for over the years.

roombay42

But not many!

The Complainer

I see little point in voting or trusting the vast majority of these soles. Firstly, many of them are sorely qualified to do the jobs they have found themselves in. Secondly, they do not receive performance based pay. Thirdly, we need a move to serious politics in this island. I propose qualified individuals with many years of experience in their fields, or something to bring to the table. Too many of them are rather wet behind the ears and have professional profiles that certainly would not command anything like their wages in the real world. We need to be more ambitious with many of our politicians and aim to get some more 'world class' leaders in the house. Then give them the money when they turn our situation around.