- Date published:
3:26 pm, February 26th, 2015 - 36 comments
Categories: class war, john key, national - Tags:
John Key has said today that he urged the Remuneration Authority not to give MPs a salary increase. Get that feeling of deja vu? Idiot Savant at No Right Turn explains why.
Most MPs resigned to their 1.4pc pay rise, Dominion Post, 25 December 2010:
Prime Minister John Key urged restraint over the setting of politicians’ pay this year but most MPs seem resigned to the boost in their salaries which, they are quick to point out, was decided independently.
Mr Key was consulted by the Remuneration Authority – the independent body that sets politicians’ pay – and said given the circumstances restraint should be shown.
“He argued there should be a nil increase for MPs, or if there was any increase, it should be in the band of other public-sector pay settlements,” a spokesman for Mr Key said.
The authority decided on a 1.4 per cent rise backdated to July and a one-off payment of $2000 to cover the decreased use of MPs’ travel subsidy. The rise boosts Mr Key’s salary to $400,500 and a backbencher’s to $134,800.
Mana outrage over MPs’ $7000 pay rise, New Zealand Herald, 17 November 2011:
Prime Minister John Key said we was also disappointed with part of the decision to increase MP’s pay.
He said he was happy with the 1.5 per cent increase because that was roughly in line with what the rest of the country got, but he said there was little need for the $5,000 to compensate for the scrapping of the travel allowance.
Key tips pay jump for MPs, New Zealand Herald, 22 October 2013:
Prime Minister John Key has hinted the Remuneration Authority is lining up a good pay rise for MPs this year, saying he had been consulted on the proposed increase and had told the authority he believed only a small, if not zero, pay rise should be offered.
Mr Key would not reveal what the proposed increase was or what he had said but hinted it was above the rate of inflation.
“But bluntly, I’m not in favour of big pay increases for MPs. If it was my vote, it would be no pay increases, but I don’t get that vote.”
He said there might be a valid argument for low increases to an MPs’ salary to keep pace with inflation. “That would be the top end. But I don’t buy the argument that they’re out of whack with the rest of the private sector or the public sector.” Inflation over the 2012/13 year was 0.7 per cent.
John Keys hints he’ll change law on MPs’ pay rises – but he’ll still take today’s hike, New Zealand Herald, 26 February 2015:
Prime Minister John Key says Parliament may change the law on how MPs’ pay rates are set in the future, but he won’t turn down a pay rise expected today.
He told reporters this morning that he wrote to the Remuneration Authority early this year urging it not to give MPs a pay rise at all this year, but the authority had given them a pay rise anyway.
Forgive my scepticism, but I’ll believe it when I see it. Every year, John Key says MPs’ don’t need a huge pay rise, and even threatens to change the law. But he never does, except to hide the setting of MPs’ perks behind the Remuneration Authority blame-sink as well(which, surprise surprise, resulted in another big increase). Its amazing how powerless the Prime Minister is on this, when he can ram new spying powers through in less than a month and pass a law to pillage the conservation estate overnight. You’d almost get the impression that he didn’t really care, and was just saying what his pollsters had told him we wanted to hear…
In light of yesterday’s statement by Woodhouse which included a statement designed to distract from how much more people would actually get fogive me for scoffing…
“The Government has taken great care in setting these wage rates to ensure we maintain the balance between protecting our lowest paid workers and ensuring jobs are not lost,” Woodhouse said.
“While annual inflation is currently at 0.8 per cent, we are increasing the minimum wage by 3.5 per cent which will directly benefit 115,100 workers and increase wages throughout the economy by $60 million per year.
“An increase of the minimum wage to $14.75 ensures there is no restraint on jobs while still increasing the incomes of the lowest paid. A higher increase to even $15.50 would constrain employment growth by up to 5,000 jobs per year,” he said. ”
So, an extra $20 bucks a week, so as not to destabilise the rockstar economy.
Has ANYONE in opposition added up what an increase to MP’s salaries is in dollar terms while highlighting what that salary doesn’t have to cover (perks).
Woodhouse is an arrogant little bastard who has the cheek to take away workers rights and dress it up with a load of tight arsed right wing crap that is just a enough to make any worker want to ring his effin neck
How long do we put up with this shit that passes for democracy
This nasty little mean minded government just voted down a bill that would have helped out young parents with a new baby in need of special care. The rich sure are cruel in inventive ways….and then stick their hands in our wallets for more money for themselves….greedy corrupt cowardly bullies the lot of them.
I wish the Remuneration Authority set my Salary.
What a great pity that we are lumbered with these parasites.
Surely there must be a better way to Govern a country without so many snouts in the limited trough.
The current “mob” do not have an ounce of decency in their bones.
The MSM love them.
To be fair, before the Higher Salaries Commission/Remuneration Authority were setup it used to be that there was annual legislation tabled & passed in record time instead.
Having an independent group do the dirty work is better than that.
The problem is that its restricted to only setting salaries for a select group.
The mandate of the Remuneration Authority should be extended to all state sector including Minimum Wage, Benefit levels & preferably some kind of national standard minimum rates for various industries (used to be called Award rates? Only applied to Unionised industries? Is from before my time so I’m not really sure how that stuff worked)
except after years of pollies saying they don’t want it, it would be political suicide if they got the power and used it…
Oh, I seem to recall a bunch of somewhat uncomfortable looking MPs who voted Yea managing to keep a mostly straight face while swearing they didn’t want a pay rise…
I’m sure john Key did tell them there should be a nil increase for MPs wages as he also gave them a sly wink.
I mean, he’s not interested financially himself. John Key gives his salary to charity, anyway……………. doesn’t he?
Only for the first year I have been told.
But then again he’s only got some $50 million as back up!
That was before all the returns on his investments since 2008. Probably at least doubled by now.
Nope he doesn’t give his entire salary to charity. It is a common misconception that National have fostered. John Key said he would be donating a “good portion” of his salary to charity if he became PM. No mention of what a good portion is, nor any specific charity names have been given. He told a newspaper reporter his “personal decision” was not something he wanted publicised.
“Charities and good causes” he said.
And guess what? Since then he has said he considers the National party a charity.
God knows what counts as a good cause then.
On the radio this morning, the interviewer asked Key whether a ‘significant percentage” of his salary went to charity. His reply left out the word ‘significant’. John Key is careful with words, and the omission was deliberate.
Perhaps through modesty?
No, he wrote a letter in full knowledge that letters from the PM are not part of the process the RA are required by the legislation to follow.
Giving in to external political pressure even downwards would undermine the independence of the Authority.
So he wrote it knowing that it would be ignored but so that he gets headlines like ‘the payrise John Key didn’t want’ that RNZ are running.
If he really didn’t want it he could have found a Majority for a quick law amendment eg to tie MP rises to Median wage rises.
and on cue the media reports Key wants change but not that he says it e evrytime and does nothing.
again that omission is a conscious editorial decision.
This is great news for those (other) civil servants looking to negotiate an increase. They had been told there was no money left, but clearly some money has been found.
funny, brook sabin didn’t mention all these other times john key wrote to the remuneration guys in his tv3 report tonight. sabin also had the cheek to say carmel was ‘in hiding’.
I was under the impression that the Govt can change the law that controls the remuneration authority.
Am I wrong?
You are not wrong.
Indeed, according to Stuff’s coverage, the Chair of the Remuneration Authority has said that it is MPs who set the authority’s rules.
“They set the criteria, they set the process, and we think we follow that process and criteria pretty well.”
So Key and Co have had how many years now to sort it?
Not brave enough?
Indeed. Get Some Guts Mr Key and sort it out!
It would be nice if we could work out a way to pay them on performance, I’m sure that most earn every cent but I’m sure there’ll be a few list MPs who don’t produce much.
In saying that I have a real problem with the gravy train that exists after they leave, if I did the next 27 years in my current job I’d get dinner out and that would be it .
Here’s the thing: the National Party sells MPs: it is a corruption machine. The money in politics is not MPs salaries.
If the rumoured $10,000 is correct, that would mean a gross increase of approx 27.40 per hour (rounded up from .39726). Minimum wage earners working 40 hours per week (if such people still exist) will get $20 gross per week while a 64 year old Jobseeker will get a massive $1.07 nett extra based on CPI of .51%. I wonder what I will spend it on?
Sorry, that should have been per day on a 365 day year not per hour.
I was called away and unable to edit. Mea culpa
Its a silly argument $150 K is not a great deal of money for the job a back bench MP does. That is if they are preforming, this is the issue, career politicians who collect the money and do bugger all. Many a list MP have it easy compared to a electorate MP. I wouldn’t over egg this as the Nat’s kick back their MPs, where as the opposition are not in the same position and we need talent which money buys.
Most list MPs spend considerable energy connecting with the communties of interest they represent (as well as localities in most parties). This tired line that they are somehow less worthy than electorate MPs is a hangover from people who never accepted the demise of FPP.
Plenty of list MPs are renowned for being slackers.
Shane Jones and Tau Henare were classic useless list MPs. The Greens are fine however I won’t shame the deadwood.
The same can be said of some electorate MPs in safe seats. It’s not about whether they’re an electorate or list MP, rather, it’s the person themselves and how much they put into their jobs.
Their seems to be some massaging of statistics –
which says:”Taking into account the change in value of the travel entitlement, this produces a package increase of 3.56 percent and a salary increase for ordinary members of 5.5 per cent,”
I heard an item on RadioNZ in which the Chairman of the Authority said that while they were required to consult with the Prime Minister, they were required to determine remuneration based on the pay of people at a comparable level in other organisations – so the higher than average increase is merely a reflection that yet again pay increases for the higher paid have not only been higher in dollar terms, but also higher in percentage terms than lower paid workers.
The letters from National MPs are pure hypocrisy – they know they will get embarrassing large increases and are merely applying their normal Nat-spin. At least Labour and the Green Party have given alternative policies.
JK has stated previously that there should be increased productivity to justify vwage increase;so FAST TRACK legislation while the public are distracted by theMSM must be Nats. way of working this.Will his hipocracy vEVER bite him in the butt?