Fewer expenses, no more pay for MPs, but job cuts in the public sector if Cameron has his way

MPs cannot expect an automatic increase in their salaries after their generous expenses are curbed, Bill Cockburn, the man in charge of setting parliamentary pay, has warned.

Mr Cockburn, the head of the Senior Salaries Review Body, said that just because MPs stand to lose “freebies” like taxpayer-funded travel for their spouses, he would not necessarily push for a matching pay rise.

He was giving evidence to the Committee on Standards in Public Life, which is writing new rules for Commons allowances in the wake of the MPs’ expenses scandal.

Several MPs have told the standards committee that any cut in expenses should be matched by a rise in pay, to help them meet the costs of their parliamentary work.

Mr Cockburn rejected the trade-off. He said: "We have never accepted that you trade one against the other."

The SSRB is next due to review MPs’ pay in 2010.

Mr Cockburn said his body would base its pay recommendation “on the evidence” and consider all comparable public sector salaries, instead of looking narrowly at expenses.

He also questioned Commons rules that allow MPs to get generous pay-offs when they step down, even when they are choosing to step down.

Dozens of MPs have said they will stand down at the next election. Even those who go after being exposed for milking the expenses system will be eligible for a “resettlement grant” worth as much as £65,000.

Mr Cockburn said: “If someone fights a seat and loses it, OK, some sort of redundancy arrangement. But if someone in a company stands down, I would not expect a payment equivalent to a resettlement grant.”


And about time, they have only had 11 years to sort this out.

David Cameron's first priority must be job cuts in the public sector

With Labour stumbling towards defeat, a golden opportunity is looming, says Simon Heffer.

“There is no easier way to save money than by sacking people from the public payroll. This will entail more than cutting a few quangos: a defence expert recently told me that 25 per cent of the 100,000 civil servants at the Ministry of Defence could go without any detrimental effect to our defence capabilities. That is just one example.

How many bureaucrats are there in the Department of Health dealing with a target culture that does nothing to improve hospitals? How many are there in the schools department who are helping achieve the stunning levels of mediocrity that so distinguish our state education system? And what about the growth-like-Topsy of our local government, where some county council leaders now have entourages and vast private offices, and where business is run by a "cabinet"?

I don’t think it will matter who is in power after the next election, unemployment will rise, as will public sector cuts.

Angus

Angus Dei on all and sundry

Angus Dei-NHS-THE OTHER SIDE