Public sector fat cats' pay should be cut, says Harriet

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Public sector fat cats' pay should be cut, says Harriet Harman

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009 ... c-salaries" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Labour's deputy leader speaks out after public anger over the news that at least 37 BBC employees earn more than the prime minister

Harriet Harman, Labour's deputy leader, last night called for the sky-high salaries paid to hundreds of the nation's senior public servants, including the heads of quangos, to be slashed in response to growing public outrage.

Harman spoke out as anger grew over revelations that at least 37 of the BBC's staff now earn more than the prime minister – whose annual salary is £197,689 – and that ministry of defence staff have taken £300m in bonuses since 2003.

The row was fuelled by the release of official data last week showing a record gap had opened up between average public and private sector pay during the recession. Median weekly pay in the public sector stood at £539 – up 3.1% on a year earlier – while that in the private sector was £465, up 1%.

In an interview with the Observer, Harman said the pay of the highest ranking public servants, many of whom earn more than £200,000 a year, should be cut to well below the level of Gordon Brown's wage. "The huge salaries in the private sector have fed across into the public sector in a way that has got to be pulled back," she said.

"There are many public servants who are paid more than the prime minister – with the pay rate and bonuses – and that is just evidence of how it has got out of hand."

Research by the TaxPayers' Alliance, which publishes an annual public sector rich list, found 387 people last year who received remuneration packages of £150,000 or more a year across 140 government departments, quangos, other public bodies and public corporations. Twenty-one people in the public sector earned more than £500,000 a year and four were earning more than £1m.

Top of the list was Iain Coucher, chief executive of Network Rail, who earned £1,244,000, followed by Adam Crozier, chief executive of Royal Mail, who pulled in £1,142,000 .

Harman said a review being carried out by the chief secretary to the treasury, Liam Byrne, into top public sector salaries would establish a "mechanism" for cutting them back to reasonable levels. Asked whether she thought a ceiling should be set so that public servants could not earn more than the prime minister, Harman added: "I don't want to give any ceiling. I am not saying that is the right ceiling because that might be too high, it might be that that is too high for everybody else."

A spokesman for the Treasury said that when vacancies occurred at "non-departmental public bodies" (quangos) the government would in future review the level of pay and, if necessary, reduce it to reflect "current labour market conditions".

This would not, however, be possible with the BBC which is a public corporation set up on a statutory footing, or Royal Mail, which is a public company run at arm's length from the government. But if pay rates could be curbed across the expanding network of quangos then this would set an example elsewhere in the public sector.

In Wednesday's Queen's Speech, the Financial Services Authority will be given new powers to clamp down on misconduct by City firms and to constrain big bonuses in a new financial services bill. The centrepiece of the Queen's Speech, the last before a general election expected in the spring, will be a social care bill laying out plans to give the most "needy" elderly people and their families the right to 16 hours of free care a week in their homes.

Middle-class families with savings and property are currently penalised by means-testing rules that mean anyone with wealth of more than £22,500 receives no financial support. Those with the highest needs are defined as anyone requiring more than 16 hours of personal care a week – such as help with washing and dressing. About 350,000 people are currently paying for that level of care at home.

[wingmanchillian]

you know, it wouldn't be so bad if these people were paid for doing a GOOD job, but from what i can tell the majority of them make cock up after cock up and to me personally that's the frustrating and annoying part.

Sh!t most people struggle to get minimum wage yet more often then not these are the people that do do a good job. maybe its the fear of loosing that job that makes them get it right, where as these fat cats know it doesn't really matter what they do, even if they only hit the bare minimum its still an extortionate amount.

/sigh

[coxie]

its like the banks, how the hell can the bosses at banks be taking bonuses when the banking industry is in crisis and the cause of this recession. They keep taking bonus but a bonus for what? losing money? If people wanna give me money I can gladly lose it for them too and then take a bonus for doing so.

[fishtank]

"This would not, however, be possible with the BBC which is a public corporation set up on a statutory footing, or Royal Mail, which is a public company run at arm's length from the government. "


Why? If it's a legal issue change the law,You are the Goverment after all FFS.

[smokerjim]

"This would not, however, be possible with the BBC which is a public corporation set up on a statutory footing, or Royal Mail, which is a public company run at arm's length from the government. "


Why? If it's a legal issue change the law,You are the Goverment after all FFS.

IMHO you have to be careful with BBC legislation.....it would be too easy to be accused of Govt interference, which can lead on to questions of BBC impartiality - as much of a pain in the arse the licence fee is, it maintains the principle that the BBC is free from influence ( real or percieved ) from Govt, commerce or elsewhere, which is a tradition that should be maintained.

In RM's case, that's only so the Govt has plausible deniability "Sweet FA to do with us - speak to Postcomm, or Crozier"

[fishtank]

I understand your point smokerjim but it's blatantly obvious self-regulation does not work.

I don't see where placing a salary cap on high level BBC employees would affect it's so-called impartiality.

[smokerjim]

I understand your point smokerjim but it's blatantly obvious self-regulation does not work.

I don't see where placing a salary cap on high level BBC employees would affect it's so-called impartiality.

Sorry I didn't make myself clear - senior salary should be capped at the BBC just as much as for Whitehall mandarins, Quangos, NHS PCTs, etc, etc....but you have to be careful something else doesn't get slipped in, like a last minute amendment.....and don't say it wouldn't happen, the unexpected result has happened before, and the current Labour & Tory parties both have various axes to grind with the BBC

[spilie]

i hope harriet meant MP`s as well

[smokerjim]

i hope harriet meant MP`s as well

- something like no greater than twice the national average salary should be sufficient

[Night Tonic]

Won't work. You would have to apply it worldwide otherwise fat cats just move where the money is and you end up with even more incompetence.

[DGP1]

Won't work. You would have to apply it worldwide otherwise fat cats just move where the money is and you end up with even more incompetence.

I'm not too sure how much more incompetence we could have in the public sector, afterall, the vast majority of senior people seem to be either out of their depth or brought in specifically to cut jobs by whatever means necessary.

[k979aaa]

Won't work. You would have to apply it worldwide otherwise fat cats just move where the money is and you end up with even more incompetence.

And as the second highest paid public servant :cfo in the country do you think we could do any worse for the money?.

[whitemoor66]

Re: Harman
I personally don't know why anybody would pay any attention to or give a response to this dicredited individual any more.