Dorset MPs slam 11% pay rise as "crazy" - but Drax says they should accept increase

Bournemouth Echo: Dorset MPs slam 11% pay rise as "crazy" and "unacceptable" Dorset MPs slam 11% pay rise as "crazy" and "unacceptable"

MPs in Dorset have slammed their planned 11 percent pay rise as “crazy” and “unacceptable”.

Both Conor Burns and Annette Brooke criticized the proposed £7,600 increase and called for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority to have a re-think before the next election.

Mr Burns, MP for Bournemouth West, would not say if he would accept the money but believes IPSA are making a mistake.

“The bottom line is that at the moment an 11 percent rise is crazy,” he said.

“I don't think it should happen.

“I do think at some point there should be a grown-up debate.”

But Mr Burns said that 20 years ago MPs' salaries were comparable with GPs and head teachers and warned “people of quality” could be less likely to take public office if they have to give up a higher salary.

Mr Burns believes IPSA has made a “cynical” decision to propose the pay rise while also looking to change the pensions in a way that he believes will see MPs lose out in total.

IPSA is also looking to change MPs' pensions from matching their final salary to matching their career average, a move made elsewhere in the public sector.

On Thursday IPSA is poised to announce whether it plans to go ahead with the proposals.

The 11 percent increase would see MPs salaries rise to £74,000 from the 2015 election.

Future increases would then be linked to average pay rises.

Annette Brooke, MP for Mid-Dorset and North Poole, is standing down at the next election.

“But I personally feel the rise should be phased in over five years after the general election,” she said.

She added: “To talk about an 11 percent pay increase is just unacceptable in these times of austerity, when people are being asked to make sacrifices.”

Mrs Brooke said she is standing down with the understanding that the resettlement grant provided to previous MPs will not be available to her. This is another proposal which IPSA will make an announcement on, on Thursday.

But Richard Drax, MP for South Dorset, said MPs should accept the rise as it has been proposed by an independent body.

The Independent Parliamentary Standards Committee (IPSA), set up in 2009 in the wake of the expenses scandal, will reveal its proposals for MPs pay on Thursday.

Mr Drax said: “I would abide by whatever IPSA recommends.

“I think if some MPs accept it and others don’t there is going to be absolute chaos.

“If all the party leaders were to instruct MPs not to take it, then that would be something to be considered.”

He added: “The point is that it’s an independent body, and if they are recommending a pay rise then they must have looked at the matter and felt that MPs should be paid more.”

He admitted the move may ‘stick in people’s gullets’.

Mr Drax added: “I can understand why the public feel as they do on this and I’m sure some are grieved that they are not getting a pay rise.

“It feels as though we are getting one better.

“But how can you set up an independent body to make recommendations and then decide that these recommendations are wrong?”

The proposals also include plans to change pensions for MPs from matching their final salaries to matching their career average.

IPSA will announce on Thursday whether the proposals will go ahead.

Mr Letwin said he would not be accepting the increase.

He said: “It is not appropriate for MPs to receive such a pay rise at a time when pay rises in the rest of the public sector are being capped at one per cent.”

 

Comments (27)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:38pm Mon 9 Dec 13

contric says...

ellwood the worst mp ever to reperesent b,mth said is that all oink oink
ellwood the worst mp ever to reperesent b,mth said is that all oink oink contric

1:06pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Townee says...

Are we taking bets on how many MP's will not except the rise? Most will rub their hands and ask for more.
Are we taking bets on how many MP's will not except the rise? Most will rub their hands and ask for more. Townee

1:07pm Mon 9 Dec 13

BmthNewshound says...

"Mr Burns said that 20 years ago MPs' salaries were comparable with GPs and head teachers and warned “people of quality” could be less likely to take public office if they have to give up a higher salary. "
.
As ever Burns misses the point. Although his point may have been true in the past that isn't the case today. We now have "career politicians" who have never done an honest days work in their lives. Straight from university, to working as an advisor or researcher for one of the political parties to being selected as a parliamentary candidate for a seat in an area they have no connection with.
.
Burns is not a Bournemouth man and has no real connection to the town. The people of Eastleigh rejected him so he was parachuted into a safe Tory seat not to represent his constituents but to further his political career. Burns is more interested in whats going on in Northern Ireland and Bahrain than he is on representing Bournemouth.
.
So this claim that paying MP's more would attract "people of quality" is absolute rubbish.
"Mr Burns said that 20 years ago MPs' salaries were comparable with GPs and head teachers and warned “people of quality” could be less likely to take public office if they have to give up a higher salary. " . As ever Burns misses the point. Although his point may have been true in the past that isn't the case today. We now have "career politicians" who have never done an honest days work in their lives. Straight from university, to working as an advisor or researcher for one of the political parties to being selected as a parliamentary candidate for a seat in an area they have no connection with. . Burns is not a Bournemouth man and has no real connection to the town. The people of Eastleigh rejected him so he was parachuted into a safe Tory seat not to represent his constituents but to further his political career. Burns is more interested in whats going on in Northern Ireland and Bahrain than he is on representing Bournemouth. . So this claim that paying MP's more would attract "people of quality" is absolute rubbish. BmthNewshound

1:16pm Mon 9 Dec 13

High Treason says...

"Mr Burns s warned “people of quality” could be less likely to take public office if they have to give up a higher salary. "

Judging by the expenses scandal, backhanders and freebies we do not have people of quality in public office. It is the same with the local council and only a few whom I consider quality.
"Mr Burns s warned “people of quality” could be less likely to take public office if they have to give up a higher salary. " Judging by the expenses scandal, backhanders and freebies we do not have people of quality in public office. It is the same with the local council and only a few whom I consider quality. High Treason

1:18pm Mon 9 Dec 13

losthope says...

Anyone seen Robert Syms? Or was the Invisible MP not available for comment?
Anyone seen Robert Syms? Or was the Invisible MP not available for comment? losthope

1:44pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Linkrider says...

I am not overly worried about the £74K salary; its the extras, pension beyond the wildest dream of most of those employed in the private sector, 'allowances' which for the rest of us would be regarded by HMRC as taxable, the various capital gains fiddles on second homes, employment of family on absurd salaries, etc.,etc., which needs to be clamped down on.
I am not overly worried about the £74K salary; its the extras, pension beyond the wildest dream of most of those employed in the private sector, 'allowances' which for the rest of us would be regarded by HMRC as taxable, the various capital gains fiddles on second homes, employment of family on absurd salaries, etc.,etc., which needs to be clamped down on. Linkrider

2:13pm Mon 9 Dec 13

coster says...

Have we not seen the advent of easy communication bring us to the point where 'representatives' are no longer required?. Could we have a system allowing the people direct input?. At the very least can we reduce their excessive numbers?.
Have we not seen the advent of easy communication bring us to the point where 'representatives' are no longer required?. Could we have a system allowing the people direct input?. At the very least can we reduce their excessive numbers?. coster

4:35pm Mon 9 Dec 13

politicaltrainspotter says...

Mr Ellwoods gone very quiet. I am sure the town deserves better than him to represent his constituents..

Not interested in local matters but if you mention Afghanistan or Iraq,he's on the first plane out there.

Good video of him on you tube being told how to hold a rifle.And i thought he was a captain in the Army ?
Mr Ellwoods gone very quiet. I am sure the town deserves better than him to represent his constituents.. Not interested in local matters but if you mention Afghanistan or Iraq,he's on the first plane out there. Good video of him on you tube being told how to hold a rifle.And i thought he was a captain in the Army ? politicaltrainspotter

4:38pm Mon 9 Dec 13

fireflier says...

Time we had a Revolution
...get rid of these Ya Boo noise making porkers who just wallow in the House of Commons, absorbing cash and resources like a dry sponge!
Time we had a Revolution ...get rid of these Ya Boo noise making porkers who just wallow in the House of Commons, absorbing cash and resources like a dry sponge! fireflier

4:48pm Mon 9 Dec 13

mikeymagic says...

Does it not speak volumes about the political system when the PM and many other politicians are saying it's completely wrong. How is it getting forced upon them to take a huge amount of public money in these times? Seems like the tail wagging the dog to me. Their salaries have not kept pace? Have nurses? There are people doing far more important roles in society getting screwed over year on year. Let's not forget that an MP not only has a healthy salary but has expenses on top including vulgar trips around the globe to twin towns, to see surf reefs in operation etc etc. Anyone who takes the cash should be voted out.
Does it not speak volumes about the political system when the PM and many other politicians are saying it's completely wrong. How is it getting forced upon them to take a huge amount of public money in these times? Seems like the tail wagging the dog to me. Their salaries have not kept pace? Have nurses? There are people doing far more important roles in society getting screwed over year on year. Let's not forget that an MP not only has a healthy salary but has expenses on top including vulgar trips around the globe to twin towns, to see surf reefs in operation etc etc. Anyone who takes the cash should be voted out. mikeymagic

4:49pm Mon 9 Dec 13

60plus says...

I would accept it if they gave me 11 percent but then I am only a pensioner,
I would accept it if they gave me 11 percent but then I am only a pensioner, 60plus

4:56pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Townee says...

I surprise the people who did the report recommending the 11% rise would now be hopping that they in turn will be given an 11% raise as well. You scratch my back and I'll give you anything you want as long as I get my share of the trough.
I surprise the people who did the report recommending the 11% rise would now be hopping that they in turn will be given an 11% raise as well. You scratch my back and I'll give you anything you want as long as I get my share of the trough. Townee

5:10pm Mon 9 Dec 13

John T says...

It's rich for Richard Grosvenor Plunkett-Ernle-Erle Drax to say that the move may 'stick in people's gullets', when he is already trousering millions of pounds in farm subsidies.
Still, at least we can all take satisfaction in knowing that 'we are all in this together'!
Another G and T, Old Boy!
It's rich for Richard Grosvenor Plunkett-Ernle-Erle Drax to say that the move may 'stick in people's gullets', when he is already trousering millions of pounds in farm subsidies. Still, at least we can all take satisfaction in knowing that 'we are all in this together'! Another G and T, Old Boy! John T

5:20pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Bob49 says...

John T wrote:
It's rich for Richard Grosvenor Plunkett-Ernle-Erle Drax to say that the move may 'stick in people's gullets', when he is already trousering millions of pounds in farm subsidies.
Still, at least we can all take satisfaction in knowing that 'we are all in this together'!
Another G and T, Old Boy!
It's around £500,000 a year !

If local shops cannot survive they go under, along with their staff ... likewise engineering works, builders etc

But when it comes to farmers and landowners it is a different matter. Never mind that we can buy the stuff cheaper elsewhere these folk have to kept in manner to which they are accustomed .... by us.

It;s about time they were forced to endure the rigors of the free market that they constantly tell the rest of us that we have to abide by.
[quote][p][bold]John T[/bold] wrote: It's rich for Richard Grosvenor Plunkett-Ernle-Erle Drax to say that the move may 'stick in people's gullets', when he is already trousering millions of pounds in farm subsidies. Still, at least we can all take satisfaction in knowing that 'we are all in this together'! Another G and T, Old Boy![/p][/quote]It's around £500,000 a year ! If local shops cannot survive they go under, along with their staff ... likewise engineering works, builders etc But when it comes to farmers and landowners it is a different matter. Never mind that we can buy the stuff cheaper elsewhere these folk have to kept in manner to which they are accustomed .... by us. It;s about time they were forced to endure the rigors of the free market that they constantly tell the rest of us that we have to abide by. Bob49

5:23pm Mon 9 Dec 13

saynomore says...

I bet our Hampshire Hog Chope is salivating I will bet he is for the rise,his nose will be straight in the trough.
I bet our Hampshire Hog Chope is salivating I will bet he is for the rise,his nose will be straight in the trough. saynomore

5:55pm Mon 9 Dec 13

FNS-man says...

"Mr Burns believes IPSA has made a “cynical” decision to propose the pay rise while also looking to change the pensions in a way that he believes will see MPs lose out in total. "

So overall they will be paid less.

People commenting here can't read, it would appear.
"Mr Burns believes IPSA has made a “cynical” decision to propose the pay rise while also looking to change the pensions in a way that he believes will see MPs lose out in total. " So overall they will be paid less. People commenting here can't read, it would appear. FNS-man

7:27pm Mon 9 Dec 13

mikeymagic says...

FNS-man wrote:
"Mr Burns believes IPSA has made a “cynical” decision to propose the pay rise while also looking to change the pensions in a way that he believes will see MPs lose out in total. "

So overall they will be paid less.

People commenting here can't read, it would appear.
We can read alright, but we're fed up with over paid, under productive, self indulged idiots. If there was a party out there with a different class of politician they would get the vote. Reality is that they are all a shambles hence the fact that most people DON'T vote now.
[quote][p][bold]FNS-man[/bold] wrote: "Mr Burns believes IPSA has made a “cynical” decision to propose the pay rise while also looking to change the pensions in a way that he believes will see MPs lose out in total. " So overall they will be paid less. People commenting here can't read, it would appear.[/p][/quote]We can read alright, but we're fed up with over paid, under productive, self indulged idiots. If there was a party out there with a different class of politician they would get the vote. Reality is that they are all a shambles hence the fact that most people DON'T vote now. mikeymagic

7:31pm Mon 9 Dec 13

dustbindanny says...

Why do they need a salary increase anyway? After all they pay for everything they have with the ' EXPENSES' that they claim, from us hard up Taxpayers, it seems to me that they don't spend any of the salary they are given? we don't need all these MP,s anymore, because this country is now dictated to by enelected ' nobody,s' in Brussels,s ? ' WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER' said our Prime Minister, well not all of us Mr Cameron, just everybody apart from our Members of Parliament Does any one know why they call themselves ' Right Honourable '?
Why do they need a salary increase anyway? After all they pay for everything they have with the ' EXPENSES' that they claim, from us hard up Taxpayers, it seems to me that they don't spend any of the salary they are given? we don't need all these MP,s anymore, because this country is now dictated to by enelected ' nobody,s' in Brussels,s ? ' WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER' said our Prime Minister, well not all of us Mr Cameron, just everybody apart from our Members of Parliament Does any one know why they call themselves ' Right Honourable '? dustbindanny

8:36pm Mon 9 Dec 13

West moors 1 says...

Thieves!!!!!!
Thieves!!!!!! West moors 1

10:20pm Mon 9 Dec 13

carrrob says...

Drax is a money grabbing a++ehole !
Drax is a money grabbing a++ehole ! carrrob

10:58pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Tictock says...

Do these MP's realise the simple fact that these are RECOMMENDATIONS not MANDATORY or COMPULSORY! Demonstrate some sense MP's - hard as it is I known - and disregard these RECOMMENDATIONS.

You have the power - you are MP's!
Do these MP's realise the simple fact that these are RECOMMENDATIONS not MANDATORY or COMPULSORY! Demonstrate some sense MP's - hard as it is I known - and disregard these RECOMMENDATIONS. You have the power - you are MP's! Tictock

11:57pm Mon 9 Dec 13

billd766 says...

I definitely agree that the MPs should get a pay rise every year BUT that it should be tied to the rates that a pensioner gets. So if the MPs get 11% so do the pensioners and if the pensioners get 1.5% so do the MPs.
These MPs will be offered a pay rise of more than my frozen pension a year and for that amount I would DEMAND that they increase their productivity by 20%, that rheir "breaktimes" are limited to 4 weeks maximum per year and that they work at least 50 hours per week.
I definitely agree that the MPs should get a pay rise every year BUT that it should be tied to the rates that a pensioner gets. So if the MPs get 11% so do the pensioners and if the pensioners get 1.5% so do the MPs. These MPs will be offered a pay rise of more than my frozen pension a year and for that amount I would DEMAND that they increase their productivity by 20%, that rheir "breaktimes" are limited to 4 weeks maximum per year and that they work at least 50 hours per week. billd766

9:05am Tue 10 Dec 13

TheDistrict says...

No rises in salaries or allowances until the MPs can sort out the problems relating to the country, and the people who live in it, and put them in their place. It should be a peoples decision as to any increase for MPs.

Conor Burns, sit down.
No rises in salaries or allowances until the MPs can sort out the problems relating to the country, and the people who live in it, and put them in their place. It should be a peoples decision as to any increase for MPs. Conor Burns, sit down. TheDistrict

9:20am Tue 10 Dec 13

BIGTONE says...

But Richard Drax, MP for South Dorset, said MPs should accept the rise as it has been proposed by an independent body..........

So if an independent body proposed you chop your hand off you would do that then? Out of touch drivel. The greediest just get greedier.
But Richard Drax, MP for South Dorset, said MPs should accept the rise as it has been proposed by an independent body.......... So if an independent body proposed you chop your hand off you would do that then? Out of touch drivel. The greediest just get greedier. BIGTONE

5:03pm Tue 10 Dec 13

O'Reilly says...

coster wrote:
Have we not seen the advent of easy communication bring us to the point where 'representatives' are no longer required?. Could we have a system allowing the people direct input?. At the very least can we reduce their excessive numbers?.
We are way past that time.......but hey! a troughing we must go - apologies to the Three Stooges.
[quote][p][bold]coster[/bold] wrote: Have we not seen the advent of easy communication bring us to the point where 'representatives' are no longer required?. Could we have a system allowing the people direct input?. At the very least can we reduce their excessive numbers?.[/p][/quote]We are way past that time.......but hey! a troughing we must go - apologies to the Three Stooges. O'Reilly

8:44pm Tue 10 Dec 13

phonehome says...

I'm undecided as to whether MP's are worth a pay rise of 11%.
BUT what I think would be a radical idea would be to treat all public servants the same. In other words, Civil Servants, Armed Forces, Police, Fire, NHS staff etc etc and MP's should all receive the same % pay rise each year, voted on by Parliament. Then we would have the MP's greed tempered by the total cost to the Treasury.
But of course the MP's would never agree to this!
I'm undecided as to whether MP's are worth a pay rise of 11%. BUT what I think would be a radical idea would be to treat all public servants the same. In other words, Civil Servants, Armed Forces, Police, Fire, NHS staff etc etc and MP's should all receive the same % pay rise each year, voted on by Parliament. Then we would have the MP's greed tempered by the total cost to the Treasury. But of course the MP's would never agree to this! phonehome

1:42am Wed 11 Dec 13

pete woodley says...

BmthNewshound wrote:
"Mr Burns said that 20 years ago MPs' salaries were comparable with GPs and head teachers and warned “people of quality” could be less likely to take public office if they have to give up a higher salary. "
.
As ever Burns misses the point. Although his point may have been true in the past that isn't the case today. We now have "career politicians" who have never done an honest days work in their lives. Straight from university, to working as an advisor or researcher for one of the political parties to being selected as a parliamentary candidate for a seat in an area they have no connection with.
.
Burns is not a Bournemouth man and has no real connection to the town. The people of Eastleigh rejected him so he was parachuted into a safe Tory seat not to represent his constituents but to further his political career. Burns is more interested in whats going on in Northern Ireland and Bahrain than he is on representing Bournemouth.
.
So this claim that paying MP's more would attract "people of quality" is absolute rubbish.
So very true,Conning Burns has to be one of the worst.
[quote][p][bold]BmthNewshound[/bold] wrote: "Mr Burns said that 20 years ago MPs' salaries were comparable with GPs and head teachers and warned “people of quality” could be less likely to take public office if they have to give up a higher salary. " . As ever Burns misses the point. Although his point may have been true in the past that isn't the case today. We now have "career politicians" who have never done an honest days work in their lives. Straight from university, to working as an advisor or researcher for one of the political parties to being selected as a parliamentary candidate for a seat in an area they have no connection with. . Burns is not a Bournemouth man and has no real connection to the town. The people of Eastleigh rejected him so he was parachuted into a safe Tory seat not to represent his constituents but to further his political career. Burns is more interested in whats going on in Northern Ireland and Bahrain than he is on representing Bournemouth. . So this claim that paying MP's more would attract "people of quality" is absolute rubbish.[/p][/quote]So very true,Conning Burns has to be one of the worst. pete woodley

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