To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Members’ pay: Self or solidarity?
Share this:
It is, in fact, highly likely that the proposed increase will face a challenge. Senator Ben Shenton has promised that he will lodge a Budget amendment aimed at cutting the annual £2.6 million bill for States pay and expenses. In effect, he will be urging his fellow politicians to accept a pay cut which would reduce their remuneration to £32,240 a year.
Senator Shenton is no doubt eager to make the point that States Members should play a leading part in reducing public expenditure. He presumably also has doubts about £45,000 being an appropriate pay level for the job that he and his 52 colleagues undertake. There will be sympathy for the Senator’s views, but he is no doubt entirely aware that the level of self-sacrifice that he is proposing is most unlikely to win the day.
That said, the award now on the table offers our politicians an ideal opportunity to show solidarity with other pay groups which, in the very recent past, were asked to accept pay freezes. If Members were to say no to the two per cent increase, they would demonstrate that they are prepared to play their part in solving the public revenue problems that the Island continues to face. In addition, such action would serve to enhance their collective reputation, which, it is widely acknowledged, is at an all-time low.
The fundamental democratic principle that no one should be prevented from seeking political office means that this Island will never return to the era when membership of the States was a purely honorary position. However, this must not prevent active debate on appropriate levels of remuneration for Members. Just because a pay level has been set, it does not mean that it is ideal, that it is capable of ensuring that the right calibre of person enters politics, or that it is commensurate with the effort expended by all those benefiting from it.
It would be wrong to deduce that because this Island prospered when its politicians were unpaid that this arrangement might ever be reintroduced. Nevertheless, even in the absence of a provable causal relationship, it is undeniable that the political giants of the post-war era produced astounding results without receiving a pay packet at the end of the month.
Related