MPs' salaries — £650 catch-up payment — rejected — 3 Jul 2008 at 15:05
Oliver Letwin MP, West Dorset voted with the majority (No).
The majority of MPs voted against the motion:
- This House notes Sir John Baker's Review of Parliamentary Pay and Allowances (Cm 7416), and is of the opinion that the recommendation in paragraph 51 of the Review for increases over three years additional to those resulting from other uprating provisions should be implemented, such that the annual salary of a Member 5 of this House should be increased on each of 1st April 2008, 1st April 2009 and 1st April 2010 by a sum of £650 in addition to (and after) any other change taking effect from that date by virtue of any other resolution of this House.
Paragraph 51 of the report says:
- I therefore recommend that the MPs’ salary with effect from 1 April 2008 should be £64,634. This is the current salary of £61,820 plus 3.5 per cent (the annual increase in the three month average Public Sector Average Earnings Index (ONS series LNNE) in January) plus £650. The MPs’ salary should increase again by the PSAEI annual percentage increase plus £650 on 1 April 2009 and 1 April 2010. Thereafter the salary should be increased each year simply by the PSAEI annual percentage increase unless the Independent Body determines differently following a review.
This catch-up payment is debated by MPs here.
-  Harriet Harman MP, House of Commons, 3 July 2008
-  Review of Parliamentary pay and pensions, Page 16, Sir John Baker, 17 June 2008
-  MP's remunerations - First package of reforms - rejected, House of Commons Division, 3 July 2008
Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.
What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.
What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.
|Party||Majority (No)||Minority (Aye)||Both||Turnout|
|Con||37||44 (+2 tell)||0||43.2%|
|Lab||158 (+2 tell)||64||0||64.0%|