Municipal mayors and councillors should be paid adequately for what they do, but they 鈥� and other elected officials 鈥� should not set their own salaries.
A majority of Esquimalt council members voted Monday to increase the mayor鈥檚 pay by 34 per cent and councillors鈥� pay the equivalent of 27 per cent. In addition, they awarded councillors a $75-a-month communications benefit to defray the costs of expenses such as cellphone bills, even though a third of their salary is tax-free to compensate for out-of-pocket expenses. Furthermore, they ensured councillors will get an automatic two per cent salary increase each year.
It appears that when you are negotiating with yourself, you鈥檙e more inclined to be generous.
We are not saying the salaries set are exorbitant. Even in a municipality the size of Esquimalt, the mayor tends to work full-time, and the councillors nearly so. It would not be beneficial to create a situation in which only the independently wealthy or the retired could afford to run for council. It鈥檚 healthy to have a cross-section of the community represented in municipal government.
The mayor鈥檚 salary is the amount recommended by a special remuneration committee consisting of four community members and the municipality鈥檚 chief administrative officer, who doesn鈥檛 vote. The committee studied remuneration paid in comparable sa国际传媒 communities and calculated averages and medians.
Esquimalt council policy says pay should be based on the median level of remuneration, but the measure approved Monday added nearly $2,500 to the recommended amount for councillors, besides tacking on the communications allowance and setting an automatic annual increase.
The issue of remuneration presents a conundrum for any elected body 鈥� there鈥檚 a built-in conflict of interest. Legislative bodies have wrestled with the issue over the decades, especially in the face of growing public discontent with politicians giving themselves generous raises and benefits in times of economic constraint.
Various methods and mechanisms have resulted. sa国际传媒 legislation stipulates that MLAs鈥� compensation increases be linked to the sa国际传媒 consumer price index. Rather than letting automatic raises accrue, legislators took into account current conditions and have frozen basic compensation since 2010.
Canadian MPs, however, don鈥檛 seem to be as in tune with the times. Their increase is based on the average increases negotiated for large private-sector unions, so they get a 2.2 per cent raise for fiscal year 2014-15, more than double the one per cent average increase for public-service unions. Obviously, the federal government鈥檚 constant preaching about restraint needs to be piped into the hallowed halls of Parliament.
Like Esquimalt, many municipal councils appoint citizen advisory committees to make recommendations, and salary adjustments become effective in the next term. That means those not running again are not voting on their own pay increases, and for those who intend to run again, it gives voters a chance to express their approval or disapproval at the ballot box.
Using a citizens鈥� committee helps keep the issue at arm鈥檚 length from the politicians, but if a council can override the committee鈥檚 recommendations, what鈥檚 the point? That only generates cynicism and erodes public trust.
And it sets a precedent when it comes to negotiations with public employees. What union these days wouldn鈥檛 love to lock in an automatic two per cent annual increase?
Elected officials deserve compensation for their time and talents. But the level of their pay should be decided by a disinterested body that sets remuneration based on prevailing trends, local conditions and budgetary realities.
Few people get to decide their own salaries. Why should politicians?
