Comment: a pay rise too far

There are times when it seems MPs seem to have lost touch with how the public sees them. If they had, it would be unthinkable for them even to contemplate demanding a rise in their pay of 21 per cent, as some are now doing. At present a member's basic salary is £61,820 - a handsome sum, given the number of days Parliament does not sit. But for the committee established by the Speaker to review MPs' pay and conditions, this is not enough; it is demanding a rise to £75,000 after the general election. Undoubtedly, its members reflect the views of many colleagues.

This has been revealed by Sir John Baker, whose own recommendation is that the Commons should no longer vote on its own pay. Instead, this would be a matter for the Senior Salaries Review Body, which would peg MPs' pay increase to those of senior civil servants. Meanwhile, the Prime Minister has announced that ministers will not be taking the pay rise to which they are entitled this year. Instead, ministers will be taking a pay rise in their capacity as members of Parliament.

Sir John's proposal that MPs should not determine their own pay would take something of the embarrassment out of the spectacle of them awarding themselves more money. But further, for backbenchers, only part of their lavish remuneration comes by way of a salary. As recent scandals at Westminster demonstrated, members' expenses are also important. There should not just be a freeze on ministerial salaries - MPs should do the same.