MPs' pay to rise by 2.8% to £93,904 in April
MPs' salaries will rise by 2.8% to £93,904 in the next financial year, Parliament's expenses watchdog has confirmed.
The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) said the decision was in line with wider Government pay recommendations for public sector workers.
Under the Parliamentary Standards Act, IPSA is required to review MPs' salaries by early July within the first year of a new parliament.
The watchdog said it would hold a further consultation on the determination of MPs' pay for the rest of the current parliamentary term in the coming months.
The increase takes an MP's salary to £93,904, up from £91,346, and is slightly below the current inflation rate of 3%.
At the start of the last Parliament, in 2019, annual pay stood at £79,468.
MPs do not determine their own salaries, which have been set by Ipsa since the watchdog was created in 2009 in the wake of the expenses scandal.
Ipsa chairman Richard Lloyd said the body aims to 'make fair decisions on pay, both for MPs and the public' after the increase was first proposed in February.
The watchdog is independent of Parliament and the Government and considers a range of metrics when deciding on pay, including national statistics on average earnings in the public sector and the wider economic climate.
It comes ahead of the spring statement on Wednesday, in which the Chancellor is expected to announce spending cuts as she seeks to balance the books amid disappointing growth figures and higher-than-expected borrowing.
Last year, the watchdog recommended an inflation-busting 5.5% increase to MPs' pay, lifting basic salaries to £91,346 from £86,584.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
At last the ‘Iron Chancellor' has turned, but the cost could be fatal
While Rachel Reeves has often invoked the soviet nickname embraced by Baroness Thatcher, she has typically struggled to live up to the 'Iron Chancellor' moniker she craved. Where Thatcher declared 'the lady's not for turning', Reeves has more frequently been found flip-flopping. We now have details of the latest volte-face, and a rough value has been ascribed to the political capital Labour burnt during its first major fiscal event. The price of all goodwill afforded to a new government? £450m, or 0.05pc of the total tax take. Since the winter fuel payment was first scrapped for all pensioners except those in receipt of pension credit, we've been patiently expecting this about-turn, which doesn't scream confidence in government policy. At midday yesterday, HM Treasury confirmed that a new arbitrary figure had been laid down to determine the deserving/undeserving old, this time set at £35,000. Those below this line of personal income will be entitled to £200 per household (up to £300 if all residents are over 80), while those above it are not entitled to keep the money. Yes, that is a personal income allowance to judge a household payment. On £35,001 and live alone? Not a penny. Two of you on £35,000 for a total household income of £70,000? The full amount. One of you above and one below? The payment will be split, and the one earning above the threshold will have to pay theirs back. Will it rise in line with the triple lock? No clue. Where does £35,000 come from as a limit? Well it's less than average earnings and nowhere near any tax bracket, so answers on a postcard please. Will the Government ensure only those entitled to the benefit receive it? No. It will be paid to all and clawed back through PAYE or self-assessment tax returns. Sound complicated? It sure does – and complicated generally means expensive administration. High street accountancy firms will leap on the confusion, but I'm not sure this is the productivity boost Reeves dreamed of. So far, nobody has cobbled together any estimates for how much this system will cost HMRC to develop and implement, but it's not zero. Don't forget, the previous eligibility criterion of being a pension credit recipient has already sparked its own costs. According to former pensions minister, Sir Steve Webb, the flurry of new applicants has already added a £200m annual cost, reducing the benefit to Treasury coffers to just £250m, not £450m, before any admin costs are factored in. That's 0.03pc of the total tax take. He explained: 'These changes wipe out most of the extra revenue which the Government was expecting to get from the winter fuel payment policy. 'Not only has the Government knocked more than a billion pounds off the expected revenue but it has also had to find more than £200m per year extra because of the surge in pension credit claims. 'Overall, the amount raised looks tiny relative to the political damage which the whole episode has caused to the Government.' But it's not just political damage – in the immediate wake of the news, gilt yields rose. Certainly, some element of this is simply factoring in the lower revenues the Government can now expect, but more critically, it is shifting perceptions. The long shadow of Liz Truss's mini-Budget continues to haunt Labour, and they are likely to be undone by their own political spin. Reeves et al oversimplified what happened in September 2022 and tied their hands in the process. Changing policy is a natural part of government and waiting for the next Budget isn't always possible, but when you tell the nation (and markets) that it's fiscally irresponsible to do so, you cannot be surprised when eyebrows are raised. Reeves's Spring Statement already effectively broke her promise of one major fiscal event per year – yesterday's revelation has broken most of the others. The policy is not accompanied by an Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) forecast (although one is promised for the next Budget), and weren't we told the cut was necessary to fill the black hole? Before the changes, ING's James Smith, a developed market economist focused on the UK, had already predicted that Reeves would have no fiscal headroom – now she'll miss it by at least another £1.25bn. With the two-child benefit cap also likely to be axed, which will add another £3.5bn to the outgoings side of the balance sheet, not to mention the £17bn cost of boosting defence spending to 3pc, Reeves is more likely to have a sore neck than any headroom. But the Chancellor keeps painting herself into a corner – she has once again recommitted herself to not raising income tax, National Insurance or VAT. She has doubled down on her 'non-negotiable' fiscal rules and respect for the OBR, forcing her to fiddle with the margins every time the bond markets hiccup. We'll have to wait and see what happens with Wednesday's spending review, but something will have to give soon, and it's looking more likely than ever that it will be Reeves. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Rolls-Royce to build Britain's first mini nuclear reactors
Rolls-Royce will build the country's first mini nuclear power plants as part of a multibillion-pound effort to make Britain a world leader in the technology. The Derby-based engineering giant was on Tuesday confirmed as the sole winner of a design competition, beating rivals GE-Hitachi and Holtec International following a two-year selection process. It will now work with the Government on a programme to initially build three the first small modular reactors (SMRs) by the 2030s, with £2.5bn of funding pledged through 2029 and billions more expected beyond that once construction begins. Ministers said the decision showed they were 'backing Britain', with the majority of the supply chain expected to be based domestically. As a 'preferred' bidder, Rolls will now hold talks to negotiate a final contract with the Government. A location has yet to be announced but sites including Wylfa, in Anglesey, and Oldbury-on-Severn, in Gloucestershire, are among those being considered. Ed Miliband, the Energy Secretary, said the scheme would boost energy security and create thousands of jobs, as part of a new 'golden age of nuclear' that has also seen the Government pledge £14bn of new funding to the construction of Sizewell C. Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, added: 'The UK is back where it belongs, taking the lead in the technologies of tomorrow with Rolls-Royce SMR as the preferred partner for this journey. 'We're backing Britain with Great British Energy - Nuclear's ambition to ensure 70pc of supply chain products are British built, delivering our plan for change through more jobs and putting more money in people's pockets.' SMRs would in theory be faster to build than larger nuclear plants, such as Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C, and come with smaller price tags – although they remain unproven commercially. Tuesday's announcement also confirmed cutbacks to the SMR programme, which The Telegraph previously revealed were being considered. The Government had earlier suggested that two or as many as three SMR manufacturers would be chosen to take designs forward, with nuclear industry insiders saying this would boost competition and ensure a 'backup' was available should the main winner run into trouble. But with the Treasury under pressure to find billions of pounds for other priorities such as the NHS and police forces, the scale of the programme now appears to have been trimmed back. Ministers also confirmed that Great British Nuclear, the quango set up to manage the new mini-nuclear programme, would be absorbed into Mr Miliband's publicly owned Great British Energy. Tufan Erginbilgic, chief executive of Rolls-Royce, said: 'This is a very significant milestone for our business. 'It is a vote of confidence in our unique nuclear capabilities, which will be recognised by governments around the world.' Rolls has also been selected by the Czech government to build some of Europe's first SMRs in a joint venture with state energy firm CEZ. The decision brings to a close a process that was first promised by George Osborne, the former chancellor, in 2015 but did not begin until 2023 under the previous Conservative government. Rolls was widely viewed as the frontrunner in the process and had already been awarded £210m of taxpayer support in 2021 towards the development costs of its SMR technology. But in the past year, ministers have faced calls from Rolls boss Erginbilgic to push forward more quickly to ensure Britain retains 'first mover advantage'. The global SMR market is projected to be worth up to £500bn by 2050, according to the International Energy Agency. Rolls is vying against companies including Westinghouse and GE-Hitachi to secure customers and set up supply chains. The company has long supplied the pressurised water reactors that power Royal Navy submarines but has more recently sought to develop SMRs and even smaller 'micro reactors' for commercial use as well. Its SMRs would be constructed from 'modules' that are built in factories and then transported to sites for assembly. The idea is meant to ensure that the plants can be produced efficiently at scale and more quickly than larger nuclear projects. As part of the SMR competition, the Government asked companies to explain how they would bring down costs over time. In the longer run, it is also hoped that the smaller price tags of SMRs will ensure they are more attractive to private investors, which have long viewed bigger plants as too expensive and risky to back without government support. Major technology companies including Google, Amazon and Facebook owner Meta are investing in potential SMR technologies, amid suggestions they could eventually be used to supply power-hungry data centres needed to develop artificial intelligence. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
38 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Foreign Office staff told to consider resigning if they disagree on Gaza
Civil servants in the Foreign Office have been told they should resign if they disagree with the Government's policy over Gaza, reports suggest. Some 300 staff at the Government department, based in the UK and offices abroad, sent a letter to Foreign Secretary David Lammy raising concerns about Israel's conduct in Gaza, the BBC reported. The letter warned of 'complicity' in Israel's actions and questioned continued UK arms sales to the country, according to the broadcaster. The Foreign Office's two most senior officials, Sir Oliver Robbins and Nick Dyer, responded to the letter. 'If your disagreement with any aspect of Government policy or action is profound your ultimate recourse is to resign from the Civil Service. This is an honourable course,' they told staff in their reply. The two Foreign Office bosses insisted they wanted to see a 'healthy challenge' to policy but said it was up to civil servants to deliver on the will of the Government. The letter, which follows several other similar missives to Civil Service chiefs, was signed on May 16, the BBC reported. In it, the signatories said: 'In July 2024, staff expressed concern about Israel's violations of international humanitarian law and potential UK government complicity. 'In the intervening period, the reality of Israel's disregard for international law has become more stark.' They went on to list the killing by Israeli forces of 15 aid workers in March, and the blockade on aid into Gaza, among their concerns. They added that 'supported by the Trump administration, the Israeli government has made explicit plans for the forcible transfer of Gaza's population'. Ministers' official line is that Israel is 'at risk' of breaching international law with its actions in Gaza. The Government halted 30 out of around 350 arms sales licences to Israel in September last year, for fear they may be used for war crimes. MPs critical of Israel's actions have called on ministers to go further, and to halt all UK arms sales to the country. The Foreign Office was contacted for comment.
