Debate contribution: Assembly Members (Remuneration Board) Bill: Second Stage

Debate contribution by Mr Gerry Carroll on 17 February 2025.

MLA

Mr Gerry Carroll

Party at the time

People Before Profit Alliance

Date

17 February 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Assembly Business

Heading

Assembly Members (Remuneration Board) Bill: Second Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4802455

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Two weeks ago, I voted against a motion that noted a 2020 resolution about an independent body for MLA pay. At the time, I said that that was the first step towards establishing an independent remuneration board. I also said that it was laying the groundwork for a potential £20,000 pay increase for MLAs. I was told by the proposer of today's motion, that nothing had been decided, yet, here we are, just two weeks on, at Second Stage of the Assembly Members (Remuneration Board) Bill, which explicitly states:

"the board must"

— I emphasise the word "must" —

"have regard to the salaries payable"

to politicians in the Scottish and Welsh Parliaments. Those salaries are a whopping £72,000. The Bill also mandates the board to consider salaries payable in the Dáil and Seanad, as well as Westminster, where salaries are even higher. Those at Westminster are, I believe, set to go up again. It is absolutely laughable that Members continue to feign ignorance about where this is headed. It is clear-cut to me, especially when it is obvious to the public and those whom MLAs claim to represent. Members have said that talk about a massive pay increase is jumping the gun. They tell us that an extortionate pay rise is not guaranteed. I hope that they are right. I hope that, when the remuneration board is established, it decides that no pay increase is warranted. In fact, I hope that it takes into account the performance of this and previous Executives since the previous pay body disbanded in 2016, as well as the sorry state of our public services, with widespread poverty and destitution, and decides that an MLA pay cut may be the way to go. It should perhaps go for the average wage of the constituents whom MLAs represent. However, I do not think that that will happen. I think that the independent remuneration board, which will have representation, as has been said, from former Stormont politicians, will recommend a completely unjustified and out-of-touch pay increase for MLAs. There has been much talk about independence, but my guess — I am happy to be proven wrong again — is that it will be stacked with a predetermined outcome. There are plenty of other objectionable things in the Bill, aside from the issue of MLA pay. It makes provision for former MLAs to join the board that sets MLAs' salaries and pensions. I agree with the Member for North Antrim: that is a clear conflict of interest. It completely undermines any semblance of independence. The Bill also removes the power for the board to determine the allowances of MLAs and former MLAs and transfers it to the Assembly Commission. A few weeks ago, I highlighted the Executive's track record, and that of previous Members, of misusing public money, including through expenses. I will not repeat that today. The way in which the Bill has come into existence is completely underhand. There has been zero public consultation — none — on the Bill, which flies in the face of the guidance. It is more than a technical Bill, as the mover of the motion seemed to suggest. Think about this: those of us, myself included, who sponsor private Member's Bills have to consult, as is right, for 12 weeks on those Bills, but there was no 12-week consultation with the public on this Bill. That should have been done; it is only right and fair. It is obvious why there has been no consultation or engagement with the public on these proposals. Ordinary people think that it is abhorrent that MLAs look set to get a £20,000 pay increase, or something similar to that, while those people struggle to heat their homes, pay their rent or mortgages, get access to healthcare and put food on the table. They are right to think that that is abhorrent. I should also mention the costs associated with the Bill. It will cost £20,000 to set up the board, and it will cost a further £115,000 over two years — the last two years of the mandate. That is a massive waste of public money. The Ad Hoc Committee that will be set up today will exclude the small parties and the voices who oppose this inevitable pay increase, as well as any independent MLAs. I will leave Members with some questions to reflect on before the vote. Is an MLA worth two teachers? Is an MLA worth three retail workers? Would any other worker who had an attendance rate of 60% over the past number of years be rewarded with a 38% pay increase? The obvious answer to all those questions is no. That is why I will not be pocketing any increase. That is why I will vote against the Bill, and I hope that I will be able to cast my vote today.

814 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:57 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification