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

Debate contribution by Mrs Sinéad Ennis on 17 February 2025.

MLA

Mrs Sinéad Ennis

Party at the time

Sinn Féin

Date

17 February 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Assembly Business

Heading

Assembly Members (Remuneration Board) Bill: Second Stage

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4802463

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Go raibh míle maith agat, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

I thank all the Members who contributed to the debate. It is some nine years since the members of the IFRP left office. Since then, during a time when the Assembly has faced a range of significant challenges, the Assembly Commission has worked through the detail of this matter. Contrary to what some Members have asserted, it is no secret and is a matter of public record that the Assembly Commission was preparing to introduce the Bill, as demonstrated by the fact that the Assembly Commission previously introduced a Bill in December 2020. It has been discussed in the House, and, indeed, only a few months ago, the Assembly Commission received media queries about why it had not yet brought forward plans to replace the IFRP. At the start of the debate, my Assembly Commission colleague Trevor Clarke set out the detail of the Bill. He made it clear that the Bill follows on from Assembly resolutions that Members' salaries and pensions should be determined by an independent body, while the allowances for staffing and office cost expenditure that can be reclaimed by Members and the allowances payable to former Members who have resigned or who have lost their seats should be determined by the Assembly Commission. He made the point that it is important to regularise the legal position following those resolutions, which granted functions to the Assembly Commission. The Assembly Commission understands that the issue of Members' salaries and pensions will attract a high level of interest and a wide-ranging debate. That was the case before the Bill was introduced, and it has been the case since then. There will, understandably, be widely differing views on the role of Members and the Assembly. Those views will be influenced by a range of wider factors, depending on whether they are from those who recognise the importance of the Assembly functioning; those who have ideological views on the issues of salaries in the public and private sectors; or those who oppose the existence of the Assembly at all. However, as was said at the start of the debate, we are not considering those issues today. Rather, we are considering a technical Bill that deals with the process of salaries and pensions being determined by an independent remuneration board. There will be plenty of opportunities to express views on the appropriate salary for Members once a remuneration board commences its work, publishes and consults on its draft determination and publishes a final determination. The Assembly Commission and, indeed, the Assembly itself have been clear that only an independent body should make the decisions on the level of salaries and pensions that are payable to Members, and I hope that all Members are at least able to agree on that.

I will pick up on just a few points that Members raised. The consultation that the Assembly Commission undertook was mentioned. The consultation with parties that are represented on the Assembly Commission was undertaken to seek an approach by those parties that could be agreed by consensus by the Assembly Commission. The Bill, if passed, will require the remuneration board to publish a draft determination and to consult all MLAs and others on that draft. On the question of why the Bill requires the remuneration board to only "have regard" to salaries elsewhere, it is not unusual in public- and private-sector organisations for benchmarking exercises to be used as part of the evaluation process to ensure that relevant and comparable roles are taken into consideration when examining appropriate levels of remuneration. As my colleague stated at the outset, as there is only one legislature in Northern Ireland, it is reasonable for comparisons to be made with other legislatures on these islands where Members conduct similar roles. A benchmarking exercise is an obvious move that will allow the remuneration board to explore comparable rates of pay in other places. However, while the remuneration board is required to "have regard" to the position in other legislatures, it is not prevented from taking other factors into account. As the remuneration board will be independent, it will be for it to ultimately decide on the range of factors that it wishes to consider, the weight that it gives to benchmarking against other places and, ultimately, the view that it takes on the appropriate salary levels. As for former Members being appointed to the remuneration board and having a conflict of interest, the Bill does not require that a former Member has to sit on the remuneration board; it simply removes the prohibition on that happening. There will be a fair and open competition, and the best-qualified candidates will be appointed. If a former Member is appointed, they will be only one voice on a three-person board. The pension of a former Member who has left the Assembly at a given time will not be subject retrospectively to decisions on pension arrangements. It is also important to say that any pension determination is likely to be largely based on the advice of pension experts, such as actuaries, rather than on the view of a single member of the board. There is, of course, precedent for former Members being involved in such decisions. IPSA sets MPs' pay, and, under the Parliamentary Standards Act 2009, its board must include one member who is a former MP. As for public consultation, the Assembly Commission has a very specific remit and therefore the circumstances in which it can bring forward legislation are very limited. Assembly Commission Bills are not subject to the same guidance as Executive Bills or Members' Bills. As this is a technical Bill that deals with matters of process, the Assembly Commission agreed that a public consultation was not required on this occasion. However, as the Bill progresses through the legislative process, it will be scrutinised by an Ad Hoc Committee that will consider the level of consultation that it wishes to carry out. If the Bill is passed and an independent remuneration board is established, it will be for the remuneration board to determine how widely it wishes to consult. The Bill deals with the processes for how Members' salaries and pensions will be decided. As other Members stated, the Bill does not set the level of salaries or pensions; that will be the responsibility of an independent remuneration board. It will be for the remuneration board to consider salaries elsewhere and any other factors that it thinks are relevant to make an independent decision on appropriate levels of remuneration for Members. Neither the Assembly nor the Assembly Commission will have the power to direct the new body on salaries or pensions. That will be a decision entirely for an independent body. At no point has the Assembly Commission discussed or taken a view on what a Member's salary should be.

I will.

No, because that is not the role of the Assembly Commission. That will be for the Ad Hoc Committee to decide. That is outside the remit of the Assembly Commission, and it has not been discussed by the members. If I have not dealt with any specific points today, there will be further opportunity for the detail of the Bill to be scrutinised in the work of the Ad Hoc Committee and the further stages of the legislative process in the House. The Assembly Commission looks forward to engaging with Members as the Bill progresses and is open to considering points that Members make throughout the legislative process. All five members of the Assembly Commission will attend the Ad Hoc Committee to provide evidence on the Bill. I again make it clear that the Bill deals with process; it will not decide what salaries Members should receive. Members need to be clear that, if the Bill does not pass, the Assembly will not have regularised the legal position following the resolutions that it has already agreed and it will not have put arrangements in place for Members' salaries and pensions to continue to be determined independently. On behalf of the Assembly Commission, I commend the Bill to the Assembly.

1,353 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not qualifying

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 reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification