Wyre Forest MP responds to possible 11pc pay rise

Kidderminster Shuttle: Concerns: Wyre Forest MP Mark Garnier. Concerns: Wyre Forest MP Mark Garnier.

WYRE Forest’s MP has criticised the timing of a proposed pay rise as “awful” but says it is right politicians’ salaries are decided independently.

Mark Garnier told The Shuttle he would not make any promises about what he would do with any extra pay and was concerned politicians doing so could result in the cheapest candidate being elected and not necessarily the most suitable.

A report is due out today from the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) suggesting an 11 per cent rise should be introduced after the 2015 general election, taking MPs pay to £74,000 a year.

Pensions will be cut and some allowances scrapped as part of the package.

IPSA was set up to determine independently what MPs should be paid, in response to the 2009 expenses scandal. Mr Garnier said people had agreed that was the right system and “had the IPSA recommended lowering MPs pay, no-one would have complained”.

In response, some MPs have pledged to give their rises to charity. Mr Garnier said: “What will result from this is pressure on candidates to make promises about their pay at elections.

“The result will be election literature all about how much a candidate will give to local charities and less about what they will do if elected. Will this mean the richest candidate gets elected because he or she will promise more than the others?”

The Tory MP said he would continue to give about £3,500 a year to charitable auction lots and added: “I am in politics because I feel passionately about serving my community and making a difference for the better.

“We want the best people to come into politics and they should be able to make that decision based on a clean financial offering, not having to work out the moral decision on how much salary to take.

“Is this a good time for IPSA to be doing this? No, it’s bloody awful and I think they should be more sympathetic.”

MPs currently receive a yearly salary of £66,396. In an anonymous survey conducted earlier this year, MPs suggested that they should be paid an average of £86,250, with one fifth of those questioned saying they should get £95,000 or more.

Comments (6)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:35am Thu 12 Dec 13

the batshake says...

If I were you mark I wouldn't give it too much thought, it's unlikely to affect you, this much needed pay rise doesn't come into effect until after the general election.
If I were you mark I wouldn't give it too much thought, it's unlikely to affect you, this much needed pay rise doesn't come into effect until after the general election. the batshake

4:04pm Thu 12 Dec 13

tuttfeet says...

Unconvincing attempt at an image of humility.

But preferable to the other one usually in our Shuttle.

Limbering up to comment on IPSA ........
Unconvincing attempt at an image of humility. But preferable to the other one usually in our Shuttle. Limbering up to comment on IPSA ........ tuttfeet

6:09pm Thu 12 Dec 13

Stephen Brown says...

Whilst there may be an argument to modernise the way MP's are paid and receive expenses; a pay rise at this stage for them is plain wrong under the current economic climate.

What's more, the Tories in their wisdom have done away with nearly every other pay review body or wage council apart from their own and that should tell you everything about them and why we live in an age of austerity, welfare cuts, falling pay and a minimum wage that is way below a living wage to meet living costs. Politicians seem to work the system to suit themselves - well intentioned or not - the road to hell and all that.

'Only' receiving £67k a year or so has not harmed many MP's household income, including our own, as they like he employ their spouses on another £30k or £40k a year or more. Nice earner if you can get it.

The sooner we elect people who understand and are in touch with ordinary people's lives the better in my view. £67k a year salary seems more than enough to me. An election in 2015 seems a long way off right now....and far too long to wait to change things
Whilst there may be an argument to modernise the way MP's are paid and receive expenses; a pay rise at this stage for them is plain wrong under the current economic climate. What's more, the Tories in their wisdom have done away with nearly every other pay review body or wage council apart from their own and that should tell you everything about them and why we live in an age of austerity, welfare cuts, falling pay and a minimum wage that is way below a living wage to meet living costs. Politicians seem to work the system to suit themselves - well intentioned or not - the road to hell and all that. 'Only' receiving £67k a year or so has not harmed many MP's household income, including our own, as they like he employ their spouses on another £30k or £40k a year or more. Nice earner if you can get it. The sooner we elect people who understand and are in touch with ordinary people's lives the better in my view. £67k a year salary seems more than enough to me. An election in 2015 seems a long way off right now....and far too long to wait to change things Stephen Brown

10:10pm Thu 12 Dec 13

John Herbert Smith says...

This pay rise is a good idea.
MPs do not get paid that much when compared to other City jobs and having higher salaries will attract more talent.

At the moment the best people won't become MPs as they can be paid more doing a different job.
As such you have the current system where many very rich people who don't need the money are MPs, or people who use it as a career and never hold a real job in their life.

What we want is more people who have been - say - a banker, and who can then offer insight into Parliament and actually be competent with the economy!
This pay rise is a good idea. MPs do not get paid that much when compared to other City jobs and having higher salaries will attract more talent. At the moment the best people won't become MPs as they can be paid more doing a different job. As such you have the current system where many very rich people who don't need the money are MPs, or people who use it as a career and never hold a real job in their life. What we want is more people who have been - say - a banker, and who can then offer insight into Parliament and actually be competent with the economy! John Herbert Smith

5:12pm Mon 16 Dec 13

Steph B says...

Lol. " people who use it as a career and never hold a real job in their life" - if it's not a real job why pay them more money?

"What we want is more people who have been - say - a banker, and who can then offer insight into Parliament and actually be competent with the economy!" - is this guy for real or just a Labour stooge deliberately discreding the Tories? Since when was a banker competent in regards to the economy??????? Unreal
Lol. " people who use it as a career and never hold a real job in their life" - if it's not a real job why pay them more money? "What we want is more people who have been - say - a banker, and who can then offer insight into Parliament and actually be competent with the economy!" - is this guy for real or just a Labour stooge deliberately discreding the Tories? Since when was a banker competent in regards to the economy??????? Unreal Steph B

7:47pm Mon 16 Dec 13

Steph B says...

"could result in the cheapest candidate being elected and not necessarily the most suitable" you're the proof against this argument Mark ;-)
"could result in the cheapest candidate being elected and not necessarily the most suitable" you're the proof against this argument Mark ;-) Steph B

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree