Changing differentials
Ieuan Wyn Jones arrived as this morning's lobby briefing clutching a copy of the Independent newspaper. Its circulation isn't that great in Wales so in case you missed it, let me fill you in on the double page spread he wanted to show us all, the one which proclaimed: "It's a great time to be Welsh".
Things are going rather nicely on the rugby and football fields, Nefyn girl Duffy's debut album hit number one ... and in the political field, given the "sense of optimism" exuding from the Assembly and the new responsibilities Assembly Members must now shoulder, the paper wonders "who but a churl would begrude AMs their changing differential?"
Well the answer is the man who came into this morning's lobby briefing clutching a copy of the Independent newspaper.
Ieuan Wyn Jones has made a personal decision to accept only 2.5% of his "changing differential" or, in plain English, the 8.3% increase in pay recommended for AMs because of their changing and increasing responsibilities. Bear in mind this is a one off review but all the same, to my mind, a pay increase it is.
So far 11 Plaid AMs have said they'll be taking 2.5% and donating the rest of the increase to charity or in some cases, just not taking it at all. One is 'sleeping on it', others have just kept quiet.
Trish Law AM, the independent member for Blaenau Gwent, will take 2.5% and hand on the rest to a charity she's yet to choose.
How much money are we talking about?
An AMs basic salary has gone up from 拢46,804 to 拢50,692. That means they'll be accepting 拢1170.01 but either turning down or donating to charity a futher 拢2,718. Ieuan Wyn Jones will give the money to Christian Aid and the Stroke Association. Next year, he says he'll once again donate the difference to a charity. The following year? We must wait and see.
I wonder if Plaid AMs' postbag will start filling up with begging letters. This is, after all, quite a precedent they've set.
The mutterings from Westminster today? That's there has been some "political cost" to Labour from this. I wonder if you agree?
And I wonder if you agree with a complaint from one Labour AM - a polite but firm kind of complaint - that talking about a pay-rise at all is "seriously misleading and wrong"? This is a "salary re-evaluation issue" and we have been guilty of following "a tabloid approach rather than an approach which informs". I'm sure the Presiding Offcier would prefer we talked about "changing differentials" too.
Every interview, every piece I've seen, heard or read on this issue has talked of a pay rise hand in hand with the added responsibilities AMs have taken on.
That is how I think it should be - but you may think differently.
I'm Betsan Powys, 麻豆社 Wales' political editor. I'll be blogging the inside track on .
颁辞尘尘别苍迟蝉听听 Post your comment
It is quite wrong to compare the work of AM's with MP's for the purpose of calculating pay entitlement. All MP's represent a constituency unlike list Assembly members, and the House of Commons sits through the week compared with the Assembly's three days.
In the Lib/Dem submission to the independent pay review body, they cite having to read newspapers and magazines as a reason why they should have more pay! Pathetic!
The question is, are they gift aid-ing the donations?
Mr Wyn Jones and his friends are higher rate tax payers. If they gift aid the donation, then they can claim back 18% of what they've given away, meaning they'll have a fifth of the pay rise that they said they wouldn't take.
I'm not questioning their honesty, but something to keep an eye on.
What an absurd euphemism- I wish someone would 鈥榬e-evaluate鈥 the wages of factory workers, nurses, policemen, shop workers, teachers, agency workers and all the other groups who constantly find themselves being given increased responsibilities without recompense. The trouble is politicians and, sadly, you journalists are so highly paid that you have no concept of the value of money and have lost touch with the reality faced by the vast majority of people in this country. Furthermore, it's ridiculous to suggest that AMs do 82% of an MP's work - some don't have a constituency, and they only sit 3 days a week. The 'Independent Review Panel' should have consisted of pensioners and police officers.
Hang about Betsan!
This vital "fact" based "exercise" was supposedly to bring AMs into line with their new "responsibilities" post the Gov. O Wales Act...i.e. Not a parliament a la Scotland but "getting there". The Hain fix.
SO, following any 2011 referendum...With more power = even MORE CASH? Surely?
This (as you suggest) is a GIFT to the NO Campaign...it is only self referencing idiots like LORD DET that can't/won't see it.
The point is NOT what the UK political class (inc. its Welsh sub-branch) thinks its worth ...It is the internal Wales comparitior in A VERY LOW WAGE ECONOMY. Which fact, "devolution" has NOT shifted one jot or euro in 10 YEARS!.
That's the REALITY.
Sorry for Shouting!
I mentioned on my Twitter that if Plaid refused the increase then they would get my vote.
It looks like they'll be getting it.
But the fact that the other AMs don't even blush over this makes me cynical about why they're even there. Even if it is all about differentials, they should still be embarrassed by the timing and understand why everybody's angry. The fact that they see nothing wrong at all says far more than they're saying.
Leaders should lead from the front, but these aren't leading at all - whether by example or principle.
I mentioned on my Twitter that if Plaid refused the increase then they would get my vote.
It looks like they'll be getting it.
But the fact that the other AMs don't even blush over this makes me cynical about why they're even there. Even if it is all about differentials, they should still be embarrassed by the timing and understand why everybody's angry. The fact that they see nothing wrong at all says far more than they're saying.
Leaders should lead from the front, but these aren't leading at all - whether by example or principle.
I've seen plenty of jobs change, with additional responsibilities added on, and no 'salary re-evalution' occuring. I do believe that politicians deserve decent pay for their work but then again so does everyone else. Politics is a vocation and as such politicians are 'called' to serve the public and that should be part of their reward (well that is what politicians tell teachers and nurses when they want a pay rise and I think it is so much truer for politicos than teachers and nurses!)
In the debate over AM salaries two points seem to have been ignored which I think are important
a) The AM new the salary when the got elected. If its because the job has changed it should have been made before the 2007 election
b) what the review actually said which seems to me to lack any intellectual basis. It notes 鈥渨e were faced with two difficulties. The first is that the Assembly鈥檚 new powers are not yet a year old. Although new legislation was making its way through the Assembly and growing all the time, none had completed its passage by the time of this report. The second difficulty is that for this reason and because of time constraints, IT WAS NOT POSSIBLE FOR US TO UNDERTAKE A COMPREHENSIVE ROLE EVALUATION OF AN ASSEMBLY MEMBER鈥橲 NEW DUTIES鈥. The size of the award was simply splitting the difference between the percentage of an MPs salaries AM currently receive and the percentage of a member of the Scottish parliament receives for no obvious reason.
For those that think regional members don't work as hard as constituency members - how do they work that out? They cover a larger area than the constituency members do, but I see no lack of surgeries and from what I have seen no lack of constituency caseload. As for only a 3 day week, I don't think anyone who has actually been involved with politics or knows any AMs believes that their only work is to sit in Plenary or Committee at the National Assembly. Most elected politicians in both the National Assembly and the UK Parliament that I have met work 12 - 16 hours a day 6 days a week.
I think it might be an idea for the 麻豆社 to do a fly on the wall documentary so the public can be educated as to what an AM actually does with their time. For some it may be an eye opener. All elected politicians (if they are worth anything - and to be reselected let alone re elected) work far more hours than are accounted directly for by their meetings time. For the most part they are buried in constituency work (acting as social workers, dealing with complicated and time consuming casework).
a m have taken quite a load of welsh mp s work load so shoud not welsh mps salary be reduced to help pay the ams pay rise
The point about gift-aid is wrong. If you gift aid, it is the charity that gets the tax back from the Treasury not the individual. So any AM who gave their increase to charity (minus the 40% tax they will have paid on it) can gift aid it and then ensure the charity gets the full 100%.
The real scandal is that Carl Sargeant will still be getting paid 拢26,000 *on top* of his 拢50,000, just to remind his fellow champagne socialists how to vote as Labour whip...
Seriously, how can it cost the Welsh taxpayer 拢26 grand to tell Huw Lewis that he should vote with his government?
Couldn't a post-it note do it more effectively, leaving the remaining 拢25,999.20 to be put to something worthwhile, like say persuading a dentist not to abandon the NHS?
Two points
1. Ieuan Wyn Jones' cheap stunt is only serious if he donates this money every year from now on from his salary and deducts the amount from his pension when he retires. I very much doubt he will do this.
2. I also doubt Mr. Jones needs the money. Despite's Plaid's policy on second homes, official records reveal that he has two proprerties in Cardiff, a property in London and partly ownes a property in France.
Seimon, you are incorrect, I believe. For higher rate tax payers, the charity gets the 22% (lower rate tax) and the individual gets the 18% (upper rate tax).
From HMRC website:
"If a customer pays the higher rate of tax, they can claim higher rate relief on the payments"
Thus, my point stands.
"As for only a 3 day week, I don't think anyone who has actually been involved with politics or knows any AMs believes that their only work is to sit in Plenary or Committee at the National Assembly. Most elected politicians in both the National Assembly and the UK Parliament that I have met work 12 - 16 hours a day 6 days a week."
I can assure as someone who worked for an AM, they dont all work hard at all, they are in the bay 1.5 days, their constituency on a Friday at most, and that depends on they have any functions on.
So much for co-operation and collaboration. Plaid's holier than thou approach won't do them much good in terms of encouraging the mutual goodwill that a successful partnership needs.
To be honest, the point of getting an independent panel to recommend pay rises for AMs (or MPs) is to avoid party politicking over the issue. Everyone else has managed to agree - Plaid's posturing is beyond the pale.
The inferrance that MP's work 5 days in Westminster is a convenient myth. Most disappear on Thursday and some only make it to PM Questions. Others take other jobs just to keep preoccupied. AM's seem to actually attend the Senedd which cannot always be true of Parliment there are often more people present in Senedd debates than Parlimentary ones despite the fact there are 8 times as many members in Parliment. I understand that there are duties other than attending Parliment. But I am sure some spend more time in the bar than on the floor.
Just a publicity stunt and rather pointless. The issue about the regional am's is interesting. Perhaps the constituency am's should have more pay for their heavy work load and the thumb twiddlers less.
The thing is Megan Wyn is that regional members do not do less work. They have a larger constituency to serve and as such are as deserving as constituency members. I really do not know where this idea that they do less work comes, I suspect from mischief making Labour Constituency members keen to get the knife in to their hard working regional opponents.
Southpaw Grammar wrote:
I can assure as someone who worked for an AM, they dont all work hard at all, they are in the bay 1.5 days, their constituency on a Friday at most, and that depends on they have any functions on.
Can I ask you to name the AM you were working for? I am sure one or two might be like that, particularly the constituency AMs sitting on a large majority (I suspect mainly Labour), but as for the rest most would be working on constituency issues. Being in the Bay is not the be all and end all of being an AM. You seem to suggest that the norm is 2.5 days a week, which is not my experience.
Irene