This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.
Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.
STATES OF JERSEY
STATES MEMBERS' REMUNERATION FOR 2009 (P.24/2009): COMMENTS
Presented to the States on 5th March 2009 by the Privileges and Procedures Committee
STATES GREFFE
COMMENTS
The Privileges and Procedures Committee does not support this proposition.
In 2004 the States recognised that it was unsatisfactory for States members to be directly responsible for setting their own levels of pay and agreed to establish the independent States Members Remuneration Review Body (SMRRB). Since the Review Body was first established it has made 3 sets of recommendations on the level of members' remuneration and each recommendation has been implemented without any debate or challenge. PPC believes that the new system has worked as intended and has avoided the embarrassing and emotional debates that used to take place on this issue.
The States reappointed members of SMRRB last October and the Review Body is now in the midst of its work. It issued a comprehensive Discussion Document in January and PPC understands that it has received a good response during the consultation period that ended on 27th February. The Review Body has already made it clear (see R.119/2008) that it hopes to make final recommendations before the summer recess this year and PPC is sure that SMRRB will take account of all relevant factors, including the economic situation of the Island. Once the final recommendations have been made by SMRRB they will be open to challenge and debate if any members feel strongly enough to do that.
PPC is disappointed that the Connétable of St. Peter has lodged this proposition without discussing the issue with the SMRRB or PPC. It is an attempt to derail the proper, agreed, process that is being followed and PPC is concerned that it may become increasingly difficult to find members of the public willing to give their time on an honorary basis for bodies such as the SMRRB if their work is simply disrupted in this way. Furthermore, to suspend the operation of the SMRRB would effectively serve to deny the public of the Island the opportunity to officially register their comments on and thereby help determine the issue of States members' pay.
PPC wishes to stress that, in opposing this proposition, it is not commenting on the substantive issue of the merits or otherwise of the £1,000 reduction proposed, because it believes very strongly that the level of members' remuneration is a matter for SMRRB and not for States members. Members all have very different personal financial circumstances and will therefore approach this proposition from different personal perspectives. PPC would nevertheless point out that no member is required to take the full amount of remuneration available and any member who wishes to receive less than the total is free to notify the States Treasury of the reduced amount that they wish to receive.