Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.
The timing was never going to be convenient. Indeed that is why it was the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority that announced an 11 per cent pay rise for MPs, and not the MPs themselves. Yesterday, as members on both sides rushed to condemn a deal that on paper seems utterly divorced from reality, it was worth considering that their protests may be yet another example of the political expediency that required Ipsa to be established.
When it was deemed too troublesome politically for the House to continue voting through its own pay rises, members were encouraged to give themselves a helping hand via their expenses instead. The result was a claim for a £1,645 duck house and a £2,000-plus bill to have an MP’s moat dredged.
Into this mess stepped Ipsa. The organisation has looked at equivalent professions and decided that £74,000 a year is about right, given there has been no increase in MPs’ base salary for years. At the same time it has cut back on perks and told members they must pay more for their pensions.
Defence Secretary Philip Hammond (thought to be worth as much as £9m) was one of the first to pipe up yesterday, saying that he didn’t want the money and that the Cabinet was likely to feel the same. Downing Street has called on Ipsa to “take into account the PM’s drive to reduce the cost of politics”. It appears expediency is at work once again, as David Cameron knows full well Ipsa’s work does just that, cutting millions from the overall bill for Westminster.
It’s easy to say Ipsa should have considered the difficulties many ordinary people find themselves in, but its remit was to remove politics from politicians’ pay. As your letters today prove, you think the pay rise is unjustifiable. But as MPs scramble to tell us Ipsa has lost its marbles, let’s remember how we got here. Too often politics is dominated by spin, by MPs telling us what they think we want to hear. If we trusted them more, maybe we’d also think they were worth the money.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments