
Public invited to decide how MPs' pay should be set
Parliament's expenses watchdog wants around 20 members of the public to take part in a review of how it sets MPs' pay.The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa) says the "citizens' forum" will help shape pay and expenses policy from next year onwards.The group will meet four times in September, and make recommendations alongside a wider online consultation expected to run until the autumn.Ipsa's review will also look at how the pay of British MPs compares to politicians in other countries.MPs' basic salary is currently £93,904, following a 2.8% annual rise in April.
The watchdog is legally mandated to review how it determines MPs' salaries and expenses following each general election.Previous reviews have used online consultations to gather views, but this is the first time members of the public have been asked to participate directly in the process.It is expected around 20 to 25 people will be recruited via a postal lottery of 10,000 addresses, with the aim of selecting a group that is broadly representative of the wider UK population.Those taking part will be asked to make recommendations to Ipsa's board as part of the review, which must conclude before April next year.Ipsa says those taking part must be aged 18 or over, and do not need any prior knowledge, or an interest in politics.
The move is the latest example of a British body using a co-called citizens' assembly model when making a decision, following its widespread use in Ireland.It has previously been employed by the Scottish government to discuss constitutional questions after Brexit. Westminster committees have used it to decide recommendations on climate change and social care.Supporters say the model can help make decisions more democratic, although critics have questioned the extent to which panels of volunteers are ever able to reflect wider views in the broader population.The model had been tipped for wider government use after Sue Gray, Sir Keir Starmer's then chief of staff, said Labour would use it to decide contentious issues such as where houses should be built and how to reform the House of Lords.Ms Gray entered Downing Street after the election but was replaced after three months, and those plans appear to have been shelved.
Annual pay awards
Ipsa was created in the wake of the 2009 expenses scandal to take on the task of setting MPs' pay, which was previously decided by MPs themselves.The watchdog does not currently have a set formula for deciding MPs' annual salaries. Instead, it says it balances data on public sector pay against the economic context, and pay in the "wider working population".In recent years it has experimented with linking annual awards, which take effect each April, to average public sector pay figures published the previous October.However, it has not always stuck rigidly to using this figure.In 2023, it recommended a higher pay rise for MPs, arguing the official data had failed to capture cost of living bonuses awarded elsewhere in the public sector.This year, it recommended a lower rise, by linking its 2.8% rise to initial Treasury plans for the public sector, which have since been increased after the government accepted a series of recommendations from pay review bodies last month.In a report published last year, Ipsa found that in 2023 British MPs were paid more than counterparts in countries including France and New Zealand.But they were paid less than equivalents in Ireland, Germany, Canada, Australia and the United States, the survey found.
Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to read top political analysis, gain insight from across the UK and stay up to speed with the big moments. It'll be delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

South Wales Argus
32 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
MPs back Government bid to strip citizenship from ‘extremists' during appeals
Security minister Dan Jarvis described 'keeping our country safe' as an 'awesome task' as he called on MPs to support the Deprivation of Citizenship Orders (Effect during Appeal) Bill. If the proposal clears Parliament, alleged extremists who lose their British citizenship but win an appeal against the decision will not have it reinstated before the Home Office has exhausted all avenues for appeal. Mr Jarvis told the Commons: 'Of all the duties of Government, none matters more than keeping our country safe. 'It is an awesome task, and one to which we attach the utmost significance as this House and the public would expect. For people to flourish they must have confidence that they are safe as they go about their lives. 'For a society to excel, its values must be protected from harm and its laws upheld.' The minister later said: 'This Bill will protect the UK from people who pose a threat to our national security by preventing those who've been deprived of British citizenship and are overseas from returning until all appeals have been determined.' He added that where the Home Office is pursuing a person through the appeals process, the alleged extremist would be unable to renounce any other nationalities they might have until the Government runs out of road. Under existing laws, a person who wins an appeal could be released from immigration detention or returned to the UK while the Home Office considers further action. Mr Jarvis warned alleged extremists can renounce other nationalities and put 'themselves in a position whereby a deprivation order would render them stateless', limiting the UK Government's powers. He has received support from the Conservative frontbench, when Katie Lam said from the despatch box: 'Allowing potentially dangerous individuals to retain their citizenship while appeals are ongoing is absurd. 'This is not a power exercised lightly by any government, and the idea that dangerous people might escape accountability by exploiting procedure is frightening.' But Conservative former Home Office minister Kit Malthouse warned that the Bill appeared to 'breach a fundamental tenet', by turning the idea of 'innocent until proven guilty' on its head. Mr Malthouse said: 'If I'm accused of a crime and I am found innocent, and the prosecutors decide to appeal my conviction, I remain innocent – until that appeal is heard and decided against me. 'And if it's appealed beyond that, I remain innocent then still.' Turning to the wider deprivation of citizenship orders, which saw an average of 12 people a year lose their rights to a British passport on the grounds it was 'conducive to the public good' between 2018 and 2023, Mr Malthouse told MPs the system had 'created two classes of citizen in this country'. Shamima Begum, who travelled aged 15 from Bethnal Green, London, to territory held by the so-called Islamic State group a decade ago, is a well known example of the state's use of its powers. She was 'married off' to an IS fighter and was stripped of her British citizenship in February 2019. Mr Malthouse said he was a 'freeborn Englishman of two English parents going back I don't know how many years' with 'no claim on any other citizenship anywhere else'. He continued: 'It is my absolute, undeniable, unequivocal right to have citizenship in this country and it cannot be removed from me by any means whatsoever. 'That is not true of my children – I'm married to a Canadian citizen. They have a claim on Canadian citizenship. If the Home Secretary so decides, they can have their citizenship removed. 'That is true of every Jewish citizen of the United Kingdom who has a right to citizenship in Israel. There will be millions of British people of south Asian origin who feel that they have a second-class citizenship. 'This law only applies to certain of our citizens.' Bell Ribeiro-Addy said: 'I do not believe that citizenship is a privilege. I actually believe that it's a right.' The Labour MP for Clapham and Brixton Hill added: 'I want to understand why if somebody was such a huge threat to this country, we could not deal with them under other pieces of legislation.' She warned of a 'sense of nervousness amongst many communities when any legislation that touches and concerns citizenship is brought to this House', and said orders 'disproportionately' affect 'people of colour, or British-born or long-settled individuals whose heritage or ancestral links are outside of Europe'. Backing the Bill, Labour MP for Makerfield Josh Simons said that 'high streets full of vape shops, dog muck and smashed glass matter so much' as a 'visible and constant reminder that others seem not to feel they belong'. He described citizenship as 'belonging on a bigger scale – a larger us' and called for 'a modern citizenship regime – reform the ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights) and judicial review, establish digital ID or, for that matter, radically reform the British state'. Having backed the Bill at second reading, MPs will further scrutinise it in the Commons at a later date. The Bill does not change the reasons why a person could be deprived of their British status, nor their rights to an appeal.


The Sun
36 minutes ago
- The Sun
Prince William gives surprise royal send-off to Lionesses ahead of Euros in Switzerland
PRINCE William gave a surprise send-off to the Lionesses yesterday before they fly off to the Euros. The Prince of Wales presented the team with their shirts at the FA's St George's Park ahead of their journey to Switzerland. 3 3 He chatted with coach Sarina Wiegman and team captain Leah Williamson. William is also aiming to fly to Switzerland next month to cheer on the Lionesses as they defend their crown. The Prince is throwing his support behind the national women's team — just as in 2022 when he was at Wembley to watch them win the title. Wills will attend at least one group game, maybe more depending on his royal commitments. Meanwhile his Duchy of Cornwall estate vowed to cut rents on charities. Yesterday, chief executive Will Bax said: 'We will waive rents for grassroots community tenants.' He also pledged to halve rents on charities active in local communities. It comes after questions on Duchy incomes were raised on Channel 4's Dispatches. It was also revealed the Duchy surplus, which pays for the Waleses' role in the Royal Family, fell from £23.6million to £22.9million this financial year. Wills pays the top rate of tax on his income from the estate. He promotes affordable housing through the Duchy.

Western Telegraph
36 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
MPs back Government bid to strip citizenship from ‘extremists' during appeals
Security minister Dan Jarvis described 'keeping our country safe' as an 'awesome task' as he called on MPs to support the Deprivation of Citizenship Orders (Effect during Appeal) Bill. If the proposal clears Parliament, alleged extremists who lose their British citizenship but win an appeal against the decision will not have it reinstated before the Home Office has exhausted all avenues for appeal. Mr Jarvis told the Commons: 'Of all the duties of Government, none matters more than keeping our country safe. 'It is an awesome task, and one to which we attach the utmost significance as this House and the public would expect. For people to flourish they must have confidence that they are safe as they go about their lives. 'For a society to excel, its values must be protected from harm and its laws upheld.' The minister later said: 'This Bill will protect the UK from people who pose a threat to our national security by preventing those who've been deprived of British citizenship and are overseas from returning until all appeals have been determined.' He added that where the Home Office is pursuing a person through the appeals process, the alleged extremist would be unable to renounce any other nationalities they might have until the Government runs out of road. Under existing laws, a person who wins an appeal could be released from immigration detention or returned to the UK while the Home Office considers further action. Mr Jarvis warned alleged extremists can renounce other nationalities and put 'themselves in a position whereby a deprivation order would render them stateless', limiting the UK Government's powers. He has received support from the Conservative frontbench, when Katie Lam said from the despatch box: 'Allowing potentially dangerous individuals to retain their citizenship while appeals are ongoing is absurd. 'This is not a power exercised lightly by any government, and the idea that dangerous people might escape accountability by exploiting procedure is frightening.' But Conservative former Home Office minister Kit Malthouse warned that the Bill appeared to 'breach a fundamental tenet', by turning the idea of 'innocent until proven guilty' on its head. Mr Malthouse said: 'If I'm accused of a crime and I am found innocent, and the prosecutors decide to appeal my conviction, I remain innocent – until that appeal is heard and decided against me. 'And if it's appealed beyond that, I remain innocent then still.' Turning to the wider deprivation of citizenship orders, which saw an average of 12 people a year lose their rights to a British passport on the grounds it was 'conducive to the public good' between 2018 and 2023, Mr Malthouse told MPs the system had 'created two classes of citizen in this country'. Shamima Begum, who travelled aged 15 from Bethnal Green, London, to territory held by the so-called Islamic State group a decade ago, is a well known example of the state's use of its powers. She was 'married off' to an IS fighter and was stripped of her British citizenship in February 2019. Mr Malthouse said he was a 'freeborn Englishman of two English parents going back I don't know how many years' with 'no claim on any other citizenship anywhere else'. He continued: 'It is my absolute, undeniable, unequivocal right to have citizenship in this country and it cannot be removed from me by any means whatsoever. 'That is not true of my children – I'm married to a Canadian citizen. They have a claim on Canadian citizenship. If the Home Secretary so decides, they can have their citizenship removed. 'That is true of every Jewish citizen of the United Kingdom who has a right to citizenship in Israel. There will be millions of British people of south Asian origin who feel that they have a second-class citizenship. 'This law only applies to certain of our citizens.' Bell Ribeiro-Addy said: 'I do not believe that citizenship is a privilege. I actually believe that it's a right.' The Labour MP for Clapham and Brixton Hill added: 'I want to understand why if somebody was such a huge threat to this country, we could not deal with them under other pieces of legislation.' She warned of a 'sense of nervousness amongst many communities when any legislation that touches and concerns citizenship is brought to this House', and said orders 'disproportionately' affect 'people of colour, or British-born or long-settled individuals whose heritage or ancestral links are outside of Europe'. Backing the Bill, Labour MP for Makerfield Josh Simons said that 'high streets full of vape shops, dog muck and smashed glass matter so much' as a 'visible and constant reminder that others seem not to feel they belong'. He described citizenship as 'belonging on a bigger scale – a larger us' and called for 'a modern citizenship regime – reform the ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights) and judicial review, establish digital ID or, for that matter, radically reform the British state'. Having backed the Bill at second reading, MPs will further scrutinise it in the Commons at a later date. The Bill does not change the reasons why a person could be deprived of their British status, nor their rights to an appeal.