Just a Quickie today. Now where have I heard that before?
What news was there on 11th July that stopped me seeing this?
IPSA released it’s recommendations for MPs’ Pay and Pensions
Briefly, these are the recommendations that up for consultation,
- a salary of £74,000 in 2015, indexed to average earnings in the whole economy thereafter;
- a new pension on a par with those in other parts of the public service, saving the taxpayer millions; (Have they not just had a Pension Reform very recently via Maude Francis?) With the Taxpayer paying 60% of the Career Average Pension;
- scrapping out-of-touch “resettlement payments” worth tens of thousands of pound per MP and introducing more modest, modern redundancy packages, available only to those who contest their seat and lose; and
- a tighter regime of business costs and expenses – ending the provision for things such as evening meals.
- Defined benefit scheme, based on career average revalued earnings (CARE).
- Based on a total cost of 22.9% of payroll (in comparison to 32.4% now).
- Retirement age to be the same as State Pension Age or 65, whichever is the higher.
- Accrual rate of1/51st of pensionable salary each year.
- Revaluation rate equal to the increase in the Consumer Prices Index.
- MPs pay 40% of the cost of the scheme; the taxpayer 60%, with a ceiling and floor
- arrangement to ensure stability in contribution rates and to protect the taxpayer
- from significant increases in cost.
- Death in service and survivor pension benefits reducedto the same level as the Ministers’ scheme.
- Transitional protection for MPs within 10 years of retirement age on 1 April 2013.
- Some protection available to MPs between 10 and 13.5 years from retirement.
Fair to Taxpayers? Some of it might be, but I got bloody apoplectic when I read the bit about redundancy packages. When did Elected representatives become Employees? Seems to me they want the best of both worlds, but why should that surprise me?
Over to you my reader, what do you think?