Deputies vote to reject move to freeze their pay

Deputies threw out the recommendations of a pay review panel which had said that pay should be frozen next term.

It means the current set-up will continue, with pay adjusted each year in line with median earnings if they go up, or held if they fall.

The panel had also wanted to restructure pay, introducing a lower band for the less-demanding presidential roles.

The financial consequences of the decision to reject the main proposals in the report brought by Policy & Resources appeared in some quarters to be unintentional, as members had earlier thrown out an amendment that would also have kept annual pay rises – supporters of that were fearful of a large increase at the beginning of the following term if they followed the panel’s recommendations.

That amendment was laid by Deputy Mark Dorey: ‘The most important thing is that we have a diverse group of people who want to be in this Assembly. Many people can say it’s an easy job but it’s not and I think we should be remunerated sufficiently and I think annual increases is the right way forward.’

Deputy Jennifer Merrett agreed. She said that being a States member should not be the privilege of the wealthy. ‘An Assembly full of retired business people who don’t need to work for pay obviously has its downsides.

‘If we want to have an Assembly that represents our community, if we want to have an Assembly that has a wide demographic, then we need to ensure that not only do they have a pay that enables them to put food on the table and pay their bills, but also that they have the resource to enable them to do the role of a deputy.’

Deputy Neil Inder referred to the nurses who were campaigning outside over pay. ‘We don’t work as hard as the nurses, we get paid more than a number of their bands, meetings often start at 9.30am when the traffic’s gone, so if you’re working in a family environment it’s not a bad job to have.

‘No one dies in our arms. This is the wrong day to be having this debate.’

Deputy David de Lisle stressed the need for prudence and to control spending in a fragile fiscal situation with added uncertainty from Brexit.

He felt it would be sending the wrong message to the community for deputies to be awarding themselves a pay rise at this difficult time.

Deputy Dorey’s amendment was defeated 19-12, with five abstentions.

When States members voted on the overall policy letter, they rejected that as well by 18-14 votes, with one abstention.

There was some confusion about where this left States members’ pay and Policy & Resources president Gavin St Pier clarified that the present rules would roll forward and it may become an issue for the new Assembly after the election in June next year.

Deputy St Pier also responded to concerns expressed that members of the pay review panel, despite being diligent and honourable, were not representative of the community.

He suggested that a change in the composition of the panel would be sensible.

How they voted on whether to accept the Independent States Members’ Pay Review Panel recommendation of a pay freeze next term. It would have set the P&R president’s pay at £71,248; presidents of the main committees at £54,744; presidents of other committees and P&R members at £46,599; all other deputies at £40,521:

For: Deputies Parkinson, Lester Queripel, Mooney, St Pier, Stephens, Inder, Lowe, Laurie Queripel, Graham, Le Tocq, Langlois, Soulsby, Prow, Oliver. Total =14.

Against: Deputies Ferbrache, Kuttelwascher, Tindall, Brehaut, Gollop, Le Clerc, Leadbeater, Merrett, Meerveld, Fallaize, Hansmann Rouxel, Green, Paint, Dorey, De Lisle, de Sausmarez, Roffey and Alderney representative Roberts. Total = 18.

Abstained: Le Pelley, Brouard, Alderney representative Snowden. Total = 3

Absent: Tooley, Trott, Smithies, Dudley-Owen, Yerby. Total = 5