States Members’ remuneration: proposed increase 2014 (P.128/2013) – comments

STATES OF JERSEY

STATES MEMBERS' REMUNERATION: PROPOSED INCREASE 2014 (P.128/2013) – COMMENTS

Presented to the States on 19th November 2013 by the Privileges and Procedures Committee

STATES GREFFE

2013   Price code: A  P.128 Com.

COMMENTS

For the following reasons, the Privileges and Procedures Committee cannot support this proposition.

1. The States should not be directly engaged in the setting of their own rates of remuneration.

This proposition, which the Committee regrets was not referred to it before lodging, risks  prompting  an  extended,  politically  motivated  and  generally  inappropriate discussion of an issue that the States had the foresight to refer to an external body some  9 years  previously.  States  Members  tend  to  have  a  range  of  financial circumstances and can therefore be expected to approach this proposition from very different personal perspectives.

In 2003 the Assembly agreed that it was totally inappropriate for States Members to be directly responsible for setting their own levels of pay and to keep discussing their remuneration on the floor of the Assembly, as had happened repeatedly up to that time.  The  independent  States  Members'  Remuneration  Review  Body  was  thus established  in 2004  and given  specific terms  of  reference.  PPC  believes  that  the various members of the Review Body – who serve in an honorary capacity – have carried out their duties very professionally; and that the most recent report of the Review Body (R.125/2013 refers) provides further evidence of their high standard of work.

2. The Review Body has followed the terms of reference set by the States.

Members may recall that, in June 2012, the States reviewed and amended the terms of reference  of  the  Review  Body.  They  instructed  the  Review  Body  to  make recommendations,  having  taken  into  account  matters  which  it  considered  were relevant, and having had particular regard to (but not being bound by) the following –

1. the principles that the level of remuneration available to elected members should be sufficient to ensure that no person is precluded from serving as a member of the States by reason of insufficient income and that all elected members should be able to enjoy a reasonable standard of living, so that the broadest spectrum of persons are able to serve as members of the Assembly;
2. the  economic  and  fiscal  situation  prevailing  in  Jersey,  any  budgetary restraints on the States of Jersey and the States' inflation target, if any, for the period under review.

PPC is satisfied that the Review Body has fulfilled the brief it was given.

3. The  PPC  is not  aware  of  any  exceptional  circumstances  that  would warrant setting aside the recommendations of the Review Body.

Given PPC's contention that the Review Body has followed precisely the terms of reference given to it by the States, the question then arises as to whether there are any exceptional  economic,  fiscal  or  other  relevant  circumstances  that  have  become apparent since the terms of reference were set, and which should have had a material bearing on the Review Body's recommendations. The Committee sees no evidence of any exceptional circumstances that have become apparent.

The Committee has no comment to make on the increase in remuneration proposed for 2014. PPC nevertheless wishes to remind Members that they are not obliged to take the  full  amount  of  remuneration  available  to  them.  Any  Member  who  wishes  to receive less than the total needs only to notify the States Treasury of the reduced amount that they wish to receive.

In December 2012, a similar proposition to that of the Connétable of St. John was lodged "au Greffe" by the Connétable of St. Saviour in relation to the Review Body's proposals for 2013 (P.127/2012 refers). When the proposition was due to be debated on 16th January 2013, the States voted by 31 votes to 16 against lifting Standing Order 106, thereby retaining the restriction which prevents members from debating a matter in which they have a financial interest. The proposition could not be debated and was accordingly withdrawn.

If, having taken account of these comments, members remain minded to lift Standing Order 106 and debate the proposition of the Connétable of St. John , the appended information concerning the rate of increase in Members' remuneration since 2004 when the States Members' Remuneration Review Body began its work may be of interest.

 _____________________________________________________________________

Statement under Standing Order 37A [Presentation of comment relating to a proposition]

The Committee apologises for the delay in presenting these comments to the States, which is due to an administrative error.

Page - 3

P.128/2013 Com.

APPENDIX