By Our Political Reporter
MPs APPEAR ready to defy their leaders and their critics tonight and vote themselves the inflation-breaking pay rise recommended by an independent body.
Opinion at Westminster seemed to be firming up behind the proposal from the Senior Salaries Review Body for back benchers to get a 26% pay rise.
However, Ministers and senior Labour figures last night were trying to persuade their backbench MPs not to vote for the big rise. Both the Government and the Opposition are desperate not to score an own goal by voting for the increase recommended by the report.
Sources on both sides were saying that a vote for the 26% pay rise would be handing ammunition to the critics.
The package on which the Commons will vote also would give the Prime Minister and his Ministers big increases, ranging from #15,000 to #60,000, but, unlike those for back benchers, not until after the election.
One strong signal of a hardening of attitude came in the disclosure that members of the Shadow Cabinet have resisted attempts by leader Tony Blair to persuade the whole team to vote as one for a modest 3% across-the-board rise.
It emerged that Mr Blair tried last week to win backing for a united Shadow Cabinet front in favour of the 3% rise, which he, along with the Prime Minister and Liberal Democrat leader Paddy Ashdown, favours.
Sources said last night that Shadow Defence Secretary Dr David Clark, Shadow Commons Leader Ann Taylor, and Shadow Environment Secretary Frank Dobson refused to accept Mr Blair's proposal.
They are likely to vote for the 26% pay rise recommended by the SSRB taking back benchers' pay from its current #34,085 up to #43,000, backdated to July 1.
They believe that five or six Shadow Cabinet colleagues could join them in the lobbies.
The hard-left Campaign Group of Labour MPs, which might have been expected to vote firmly for restraint, also appears to be split.
Some members of the 30 to 40-strong grouping seem ready to vote for the 26% rise - in part to secure the review body's recommendation that the highly controversial matter be removed from the Commons arena altogether in future years.
Tory and Labour back benchers, and all the Liberal Democrats, will have a free vote on the matter.
The Government ``payroll'' of some 120 Ministers, whips and parliamentary aides, will be whipped to back the 3% rise.
However, some ministerial aides plan to vote for the SSRB package, expecting no recriminations or demotions if they do, while whips are not going out of their way to make everyone turn up.
One member of the payroll vote noted wryly: ``We are being told to vote for restraint, but we're all hoping like hell that our colleagues turn up and vote us down.''
Tory MP John Carlisle yesterday accused Mr Major of cowardice over the affair. Mr Carlisle (Luton North) said on BBC2: ``I think the attitude is hardening.
``I think MPs will vote for it on the basis that this is probably their last chance.''
Labour MP Joe Ashton pledged last night to give his #9000 pay rise to a hospital in his Bassetlaw constituency if the Commons backed the increase.
Mr Ashton said he would vote for the rise: ``Some people will vote against it and then take the bloody money.''
It is possible that at the end of the three-hour debate, MPs will increase public wrath by not only voting themselves the 26% pay rise, but also rejecting the SSRB's proposal that their car mileage allowances be cut from 74.1p a mile for big cars to a standard 47.2p.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article