Plaid Cymru AM Lindsay Whittle has said he will refuse a £10,000 pay rise if he is re-elected to the National Assembly of Wales next year.
The controversial pay rise – 18.5% on the current salary of £54,000 – was announced by the independent Remuneration Board of the National Assembly for Wales on May 22.
It outlined the salaries and level of financial support that will be available to AMs after the election in 2016.
Mr Whittle, Assembly Member for South Wales East, said: “If re-elected to the National Assembly next May, I will not be taking the £10,000 a year salary rise proposed. I believe that the current salary of £54,000 is enough.”
Former Caerphilly Council leader Mr Whittle is also a councillor for the Penyrheol area and, since being elected to the Assembly in 2011, has declined his annual allowance of more than £13,000.
The pay rise has sparked criticism, especially at a time of public sector cuts.
Jonathan Isaby, Chief Executive of the TaxPayers’ Alliance pressure group, said: “It can’t be one rule for most of the public sector and another for Assembly Members.
“We are trying to find necessary savings across government through serious restraint on salaries, so clearly now is not the time for a pay rise of this extraordinary size.
“The Remuneration Board has shown itself to be totally out of touch with public opinion and they need to reconsider their decision as soon as possible.”
Sandy Blair, Chair of the Remuneration Board, defended the pay rises.
He said: Our determination recognises the fact that after the 2016 election, the National Assembly will have become a markedly different and more significant institution than when originally established. It will have law-making, tax-setting and borrowing powers like those of the UK and Scottish parliaments.
“I believe the work the board has done has produced a remuneration regime which is appropriate for the institution, and the increasing responsibilities which lie ahead.”
Labour’s Caerphilly AM Jeff Cuthbert, who will not be standing for re-election next year, said he agreed with the Remuneration Board but that any increase should not be implemented now.
He said: “I can be a bit more objective as I won’t benefit from it, but there are two issues: Are AMs worth that level of salary? The answer is yes.
“Should They receive it at this point? The answer is no.”
Mr Cuthbert added that at a time when workers’ wages were being held back, the thought of politicians receiving such a significant rise was unjustified.”
First Minister Carwyn Jones has previously said he could not see how Labour could support the increase.
His salary will rise to £140,000, while his cabinet members will receive £100,000.
A Labour Party spokesman has said they had consistently opposed the level of the pay rise and were disappointed with the Remuneration Board’s decision.
Plaid Cymru leader Leanne Wood has said she could not support the pay rise and has said she will not accept it, while the Liberal Democrats described it as “unacceptable”.
The Welsh Conservatives said they will “consider” the pay rise properly in due course.
Good to hear this from Lindsay Whittle. The Same goes for his leader Leanne Wood.
AM Jeff Cuthbert is WRONG in his view that AM`s `deserve` a pay rise of
over 18%, although he is as much entitled to take that view as I am to disagree with it.
Already,AM`s have a larger than average salary, and they already get higher pay if they hold ministerial or junior minister roles, ( so those exercising
their brains beyond the ones they sit on already get enhanced pay
levels) , they have extraordinary and strange expenses packages, they
have access to subsidised extended traveling expenses, they have access
to meals, subsidised by every Welsh Citizen rich or poor, they even have
access to licenced bars and subsidised OFF LICENCE purchases.Those who
reach the dizzy heights of the top table of Assembly Movers and Shakers
also have access to a CAR and a DRIVER to be ridden around the
principality like some `state` oligarch.
The fact is that when the Pay Review Board look at the possible increase in any additional intellectual ability necessary to attract new AMs
to be equipped to deal with all the new devolved powers,(which they say
they have based these pay recommendation on) they are ignoring the
fact that it is the Welsh Civil Service that will deal with these new
powers, not Assembly Members, left to them they will design a horse that
looks like a Camel.They have already defined their own particular
vocabulary which the public cannot understand, and therefore not follow
in their tiresome debates, Unless Assembly Members are expected to work
longer hours, forgo their long holidays, and give up their rights to
subsidised this and that, they should not get this proposed pay hike,
keep any possible rise to that proposed in Local Government in Wales,
that given to NHS Staff, and that given to pensioners in Wales. Base it on inflation?.
Good to hear this from Lindsay Whittle. The Same goes for his leader Leanne Wood.
AM Jeff Cuthbert is WRONG in his view that AM`s `deserve` a pay rise of
over 18%, although he is as much entitled to take that view as I am to disagree with it.
Already,AM`s have a larger than average salary, and they already get higher pay if they hold ministerial or junior minister roles, ( so those exercising
their brains beyond the ones they sit on already get enhanced pay
levels) , they have extraordinary and strange expenses packages, they
have access to subsidised extended traveling expenses, they have access
to meals, subsidised by every Welsh Citizen rich or poor, they even have
access to licenced bars and subsidised OFF LICENCE purchases.Those who
reach the dizzy heights of the top table of Assembly Movers and Shakers
also have access to a CAR and a DRIVER to be ridden around the
principality like some `state` oligarch.
The fact is that when the Pay Review Board look at the possible increase in any additional intellectual ability necessary to attract new AMs
to be equipped to deal with all the new devolved powers,(which they say
they have based these pay recommendation on) they are ignoring the
fact that it is the Welsh Civil Service that will deal with these new
powers, not Assembly Members, left to them they will design a horse that
looks like a Camel.They have already defined their own particular
vocabulary which the public cannot understand, and therefore not follow
in their tiresome debates, Unless Assembly Members are expected to work
longer hours, forgo their long holidays, and give up their rights to
subsidised this and that, they should not get this proposed pay hike,
keep any possible rise to that proposed in Local Government in Wales,
that given to NHS Staff, and that given to pensioners in Wales. Base it on inflation?.
I totally disagree with Jeff Cuhbert’s view that AMs deserve a £200 per week pay rise to add to their already generous salary. This increase in expenditure on must be paid for by increased borrowing, increased taxation or by cutting the money to a more deserving case.
In these difficult times more borrowing would be simply crazy, the British government borrowed £86.3 Billion between January and December last year, far too high and not sustainable. Increasing taxation will simply damp down the economy even more. That leaves cuts to government expenditure. In Wales, where a disproportionate number of people work in the public sector, any cuts will directly affect many Welsh workers. It could mean fewer jobs, lower pay or both.
I say let the AMs take their share of the harships caused by the financial crash. Managing to make do with £54,000 salary plus expences and subsidies is a level of income that most Welsh workers and Business people can only dream of. If any AMs genuinely believe that their intellect and abilities are worth far more let them leave prior to this election. We can then vote for people who really do want the job.
I totally disagree with Jeff Cuhbert’s view that AMs deserve a £200 per week pay rise to add to their already generous salary. This increase in expenditure on salaries must be paid for by increased borrowing, increased taxation or by cutting the money to a more deserving case.
In these difficult times more borrowing would be simply crazy, the British government borrowed £86.3 Billion between January and December last year, far too high and not sustainable. Increasing taxation will simply damp down the economy even more. That leaves cuts to government expenditure. In Wales, where a disproportionate number of people work in the public sector, any cuts will directly affect many Welsh workers. It could mean fewer jobs, lower pay or both.
I say let the AMs take their share of the harships caused by the financial crash. Managing to make do with £54,000 salary plus expences and subsidies is a level of income that most Welsh workers and Business people can only dream of. If any AMs genuinely believe that their intellect and abilities are worth far more let them leave prior to this election. We can then vote for people who really do want the job.
The Assembly Pay Review Board, state the reason why they are applying this huge hike in pay for Assembly Members is, to attract a more interlectual and better educated and mentally equiped candidate for election, (my words not theirs but I think i`ve got the point).
This `Board` must feel they have the right to interfere with the democratic processes of the voters of Wales who choose and elect WHO THEY WANT, not who the `Board` feel we should elect.
The great problem with their thinking is that if the local, ex-miner, ex-steel worker, farm labourer, shop worker, cleaner, cook, road sweeper, bricklayer, factory worker, or anyone else who, for instance, is not University Educated, not of the `professional` classes, but is a fully paid up member of the `manufacturing classes`, who may have already cut their teeth in local politics, community work in their communities, volunteering to help and assist others less able, or otherwise play their full part in building a `good life` for themselves thier families and others and their communities, will NOT be worthy of standing for election to the Welsh Assembly, but much more sinister from this faceless `Boards` point of view, they say they will not be `Equiped` to do so. Absolute rubbish. ABSOLUTE RUBBISH.
It is just this gratuitous patronising pontificating from sycophantic men, and I presume women, on this Board, which is designed to put off able, good, and very well equiped people from standing in Assembly Elections to represent their communities. They do a serious disservice to democracy in Wales by holding the view, let alone publicly expressing it to great fanfare in order to sustanciate this pay hike..
If they get their way future Assembly Election Candidates will have to pass an educational assesment, election material will have to carry information about a candidates educational standard to ensure they are intelectually and educationally equiped to do the job, but, the news for these Pay Board People is that the electorate will decide who respesents us not THEM. Lets hope these the views expressed by this `Board` do not disuade the true and the good from putting their names forward to stand in Assembly Elections, regardless of their politics.
The Assembly Pay Review Board, state the reason why they are applying this huge hike in pay for Assembly Members is, to attract a more intelectual and better educated and mentally equiped candidate for election, (my words not theirs but I think i`ve got the point).
This `Board` must feel they have the right to interfere with the democratic processes of the voters of Wales who choose and elect WHO THEY WANT, not who the `Board` feel we should elect.
The great problem with their thinking is that if the local, ex-miner, ex-steel worker, farm labourer, shop worker, cleaner, cook, road sweeper, bricklayer, factory worker, or anyone else who, for instance, is not University Educated, not of the `professional` classes, but is a fully paid up member of the `manufacturing classes`, who may have already cut their teeth in local politics, community work in their communities, volunteering to help and assist others less able, or otherwise play their full part in building a `good life` for themselves thier families and others and their communities, will NOT be worthy of standing for election to the Welsh Assembly, but much more sinister from this faceless `Boards` point of view, they say they will not be `Equiped` to do so. Absolute rubbish. ABSOLUTE RUBBISH.
It is just this gratuitous patronising pontificating from sycophantic men, and I presume women, on this Board, which is designed to put off able, good, and very well equiped people from standing in Assembly Elections to represent their communities. They do a serious disservice to democracy in Wales by holding the view, let alone publicly expressing it to great fanfare in order to sustanciate this pay hike..
If they get their way future Assembly Election Candidates will have to pass an educational assesment, election material will have to carry information about a candidates educational standard to ensure they are `judged` intelectually and educationally equiped to do the job, but, the news for these Pay Board People is that the electorate will decide who respesents us not THEM. Lets hope the views expressed by this `Board` do not disuade the true and the good from putting their names forward to stand in Assembly Elections, regardless of their politics.
Richard Williams and Trefor Bond have every right to disagree with my view. B
ut I find their comments strange given that I stated quite clearly that the award should not be made under the current economic circumstances.
I fully understand the two points Jeff` makes, which he reiterates here, and I agree with his second point.
It is the first point I do not agree with, and that point is, for some reason Jeff feels that Assembly Members should be awarded the plus 18% pay hike. But due to the economic circumstances should not be paid at present, I simply disagree that Assembly Members are underpaid by at least 18%. If they feel they are underpaid they can simply stand down at the four year opportunity and revert to normality and let someone else, who would claw their way through political selection, and over broken glass, knocking all competition aside to trouser £58,000,plus expenses plus subsidised meals etc etc and a job with no real assesment of their capabilities and productivity except at election time. And even then they are given a golden goodby.
I have no wish to have a protracted discussion with Trefor or anyone else on this matter but I must be clear on one point.
I don’t know any AM or MP that went into the job for the money. Many of us willing took a reduction in our income to be an elected representative. And all of us have “clawed their way through political selection etc.”.
I’m not aware of any AM or MP that is complaining about our current salary. Neither did any AM or MP ask for a pay increase. Indeed AMs voluntarily took a four year pay freeze that has just ended.
The matter of pay and conditions is resolved independently. In other words the “award” has been taken out of our hands.
AMs in the next Assembly will have even greater responsibility than we have now. So I don’t believe that the conclusion of the Remuneration Board is wrong in principal. But it is wrong in practice because we must recognise the times that we live in. The Labour Group has made clear it’s disappointment that the award is to be made at this time and I share that view.
It is for all the reasons given by Jeff that I reserve my critisism to `The Pay Review Board`. Wrong to make such an award at this time, made for all the wrong reasons, particularly when, in stating the `reasons` for the award Mr Blair` said that the award is necessary in order to attract better `equiped` potential AM`s. This clearly means `shutting out` those from the manufacturing classes, I dont think Labour politicians will be happy with such a sentiment being publicly expressed?.or am I wrong in thinking this?.
If it is true that Jeff knows “no AM or MP that went into the job for money” then why award a massive pay rise? Why award a pay rise at all?
In the world outside politics jobs are advertised at a rate judged to be resonable by the employers. If nobody suitable applies then there is a reconsideration of the pay and conditions and the job is readvertised.
So far as I know there are no shortage of applicants for well rewarded political jobs, there were seven applicants [condidates] for the position of MP. I saw all of them in action during the campaign and would say that any one of them is capable of doing the work of a member of parliament. Jeff seems to think that a four year pay freeze is a remarkable sacrifice, the truth is that for many people their salary is far lower than it was four years ago.
Richard Williams and Trefor Bond have every right to disagree with my view. B
ut I find their comments strange given that I stated quite clearly that the award should not be made under the current economic circumstances.
I fully understand the two points Jeff` makes, which he reiterates here, and I agree with his second point.
It is the first point I do not agree with, and that point is, for some reason Jeff feels that Assembly Members should be awarded the plus 18% pay hike. But due to the economic circumstances should not be paid at present, I simply disagree that Assembly Members are underpaid by at least 18%. If they feel they are underpaid they can simply stand down at the four year opportunity and revert to normality and let someone else, who would claw their way through political selection, and over broken glass, knocking all competition aside to trouser £58,000,plus expenses plus subsidised meals etc etc and a job with no real assesment of their capabilities and productivity except at election time. And even then they are given a golden goodby.
I have no wish to have a protracted discussion with Trefor or anyone else on this matter but I must be clear on one point.
I don’t know any AM or MP that went into the job for the money. Many of us willing took a reduction in our income to be an elected representative. And all of us have “clawed their way through political selection etc.”.
I’m not aware of any AM or MP that is complaining about our current salary. Neither did any AM or MP ask for a pay increase. Indeed AMs voluntarily took a four year pay freeze that has just ended.
The matter of pay and conditions is resolved independently. In other words the “award” has been taken out of our hands.
AMs in the next Assembly will have even greater responsibility than we have now. So I don’t believe that the conclusion of the Remuneration Board is wrong in principal. But it is wrong in practice because we must recognise the times that we live in. The Labour Group has made clear it’s disappointment that the award is to be made at this time and I share that view.
It is for all the reasons given by Jeff that I reserve my critisism to `The Pay Review Board`. Wrong to make such an award at this time, made for all the wrong reasons, particularly when, in stating the `reasons` for the award Mr Blair` said that the award is necessary in order to attract better `equiped` potential AM`s. This clearly means `shutting out` those from the manufacturing classes, I dont think Labour politicians will be happy with such a sentiment being publicly expressed?.or am I wrong in thinking this?.
If it is true that Jeff knows “no AM or MP that went into the job for money” then why award a massive pay rise? Why award a pay rise at all?
In the world outside politics jobs are advertised at a rate judged to be resonable by the employers. If nobody suitable applies then there is a reconsideration of the pay and conditions and the job is readvertised.
So far as I know there are no shortage of applicants for well rewarded political jobs, there were seven applicants [candidates] for the position of MP. I saw all of them in action during the campaign and would say that any one of them is capable of doing the work of a member of parliament. Jeff seems to think that a four year pay freeze is a remarkable sacrifice, the truth is that for many people their salary is far lower than it was four years ago.