Deputy slams politicians’ pay review board

Thursday 11 April 2019

A Deputy has called for the board responsible for assessing States Members’ pay to be sacked amid concerns they don’t fully understand what politicians do, and that they could be wasting taxpayers’ money.

Deputy Jeremy Maçon, who is trained in social research, says he is concerned about the methodology being used by the States Members Remuneration Review Board (SMRRB).

The group launched a review in February, contracting 4Insight to conduct focus groups with members of the public in March over their opinion on States Members’ £46,600 annual salary. 

This information will then be used in a report that will ultimately influence States Members’ salaries following the next election. 

Pictured: States Members are currently paid just under £47,000 per year.

But the Deputy has blasted the SMRRB for launching a survey amid a tense public sector pay dispute, which he feels is likely to skew results, and is similarly critical of the fact that politicians have not been asked about what their role entails in advance, meaning that members of the public may not be provided with accurate information to help form their views. 

His frustrations emerged in a series of emails released under the Freedom of Information Law in which he accuses the SMRRB of “incompetence”.

Addressing Deputy Russell Labey, who is Chair of the Privileges and Procedures Committee (PPC) – a group that oversees matters relating to politicians’ work conditions – and a number of other politicians, Deputy Maçon asked to “sack them” and replace them with a HR professional, “as clearly this board are not up to scratch”.

In a subsequent email, he wrote that the board don’t “fully know what States Members do, therefore how can they possibly instruct a focus group wth fair, unbiased and accurate information when the board also at our PPC meeting agreed the the [sic] public didn’t understand what we did!” 

Deputy Labey agreed with the sentiment, replying to one message: “It seems to me that Jeremy has a valid point. What is the point on spending money on market research without first informing participants comprehensively on what the workload and responsibilities of a States Member actually comprises?” 

Pictured: Deputy Labey, Chair of PPC, agreed with Deputy Maçon about the SMRRB's approach.

States Members pay has for a long time been a controversial issue, as politicians do not have a set job description, meaning that some may end up working longer hours than others.

At present, pay is set at an annual sum of £46,600. This used to be £4,000 lower, with this figure available for expenses, but the sum was absorbed into States Members’ fully taxable salaries in 2015.

There has also previously been controversy over whether Ministers should be paid more for taking on additional responsibility. At present, this is not the case. In their most recent review, they recommended that pay remain at £46,600 until 2022, and that the Chief Minister be paid more. 

Explaining his objections to the SMRRB’s most recent review in more detail, Deputy Maçon told Express: “I along with the Members of the Privileges and Procedures Committee think that it’s completely the wrong time and inappropriate to be asking about States Members pay and resources whilst there are on going public sector pay disputes, and we’ve expressed this to the Board repeatedly.

“I object to the process in that the Board have themselves not properly informed themselves about what States Members actually do whilst carrying out their duties - which the board has agreed that they are not completely informed. Therefore, when consulting with the public how can the Board (or the survey company) dispel and challenge any bias or prejudice from the public during the consultation?”

Pictured: One of Deputy Maçon's emails.

He therefore says he feels that “any survey result will be flawed and is a total waste of taxpayers money - all of which I’ve expressed to the Board”.

“The Board and independent of States Members and we can’t direct them. However, as I’ve trained in social research I don’t have confidence in Board and think that they are no longer fit for purpose and have made them aware of this,” Deputy Maçon concluded. 

Express has contacted the SMRRB for a response, and is yet to receive a reply.