Navigate Up
Sign In
Privacy Policy

IPSA publishes final report on MPs’ pay and pensions

The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority today published its decisions on reforming MPs’ pay and pensions.

IPSA has set out a package of reform with the following elements:
· A one-off uplift in salary to £74,000 in 2015, an increase of 9.26%, to address the historic shortfall. Thereafter, MPs’ pay will be linked to average earnings – if they go up, so will MPs’. If they don’t, neither will MPs’.
·A new pension on a par with those in other parts of the public service, saving the taxpayer millions. Following public consultation on our proposals from earlier this year, we have decided to increase MPs’ pension contributions further, reducing the cost to the taxpayer even further.
· Scrapping out-of-touch “resettlement payments” worth tens of thousands of pound per MP. These will be replaced with more modest loss-of-office payments, which will be available only to those who contest their seat and lose.
· A tighter regime of business costs and expenses, including ending the provision for evening meals.
Taken together, this package of reform is cost neutral.
IPSA is obliged by statute to review its determination on MPs’ pay in the first year of each Parliament, and will review the decisions on MPs’ pay following the 2015 election before implementing them. 
IPSA also continue to develop the idea of MPs providing an account of their activities throughout the year.
IPSA’s chair, Sir Ian Kennedy, said the reforms would set MPs’ pay on a sustainable footing for a generation when implemented after 2015 general election.
“For the first time, MPs’ pay and pensions will be set independently, and away from political deals cooked up in Westminster. We are sweeping away the out-of-date and overly generous benefits, and introducing a one-off uplift in pay. Crucially, thereafter MPs’ pay will be linked to everyone elses’.


“We have designed these reforms so they do not cost the taxpayer a penny more. When taken with the tens of millions we have saved by reforming the business cost and expenses regime, we have saved the taxpayer over £35 million with the changes we have introduced since 2010.”





mike smith

in 2006 I wanted a crime and corruption com like Australia independent of any person that has been in gov I was refused it did not even go on the refusal siteThere has been more corrupt MPs and Lords since thatcher than in the 1000 years of history

on 17/02/2015 20:25:00


When the rest of the public sector has had a pay freeze for the last 5 years and a 1% payrise this year you have just given the MP's a 10% pay rise and a 25% pension enhancement. DISGRACE !!!!!!

on 18/11/2014 10:23:00

Happy Worker

An 11% softener...When people are hurting and suffering from reductions in pay and pay freezes...Well done IPSA your decision has alienated many more and how can you serve public interest with decisions like this.

on 02/10/2014 06:19:00

mr r

absolutely disgusting out of touch with reality

on 11/09/2014 07:34:00

mr r


on 11/09/2014 07:33:00

Warped and immoral

This is happening when public sector workers have been offered 1% after a 3 yr freeze. NHS staff are being given a big fat zero. Beyond disgusting...

on 08/07/2014 17:43:00

9.26% Ha!!

Someone needs to go back to school. They currently make £66,396 and an 11% increase would be £7304. That comes to £73,600 and they will be getting £74,000, so they will be getting MORE than 11%!!

on 19/03/2014 18:47:00

No mention

of this today! They will get their pay rise and the rest of us are s**t out of luck. We will be lucky to get 2%

on 19/03/2014 18:36:00

Mr Kelvyn Guest

Greed, nothing more than greed. Absolutely shameful in light that the rest of us are being told to tighten our belts even further!

on 07/01/2014 17:51:00


comparing MPs to GP or Head teachers is not a fair comparison. Neither of these get unlimited expenses. Neither one can sell the entire contents of their house and then replace it all with taxpayers money

on 20/12/2013 22:43:00

Tim Boaden

IPSA is totally out of touch with public opinion, and whatever 'evidence' it has relied upon, its 11% increase for MPs' salaries is immoral in the same economic climate which is affecting everyone else.

on 20/12/2013 21:06:00

Ask your MP.

We should all ask our repective MP if they are going to accept the proposed pay increase and ask them to make their reply by way of a Public Statement.

on 20/12/2013 11:44:00


The 11 percent increase is unjustified and wrong.Many ordianary people have to meet the cost of higher pension contributions without any pay increase at all.

on 19/12/2013 19:45:00

Seems fair enough to me

But making MPs pay for their own tea and coffee seems a bit tight. I can't think of a profession that makes the staff do that! In generally the expenses do seem designed to irritate MPs rather than save time & cost.

on 13/12/2013 23:22:00

University lecturer

We where offered a 1% rise due to the economy - I decided this was reasonable - my pay is now 36k with no real expences - how can this 11% be justified in any " we are all in this together'" way? Disgusted and let down

on 13/12/2013 17:00:00


It is wrong to claim that there is significant support for a pay rise for MPs. IPSA's own figures show that the majority is against such an increase. How can it be justified when many other people across the UK are having their pay and benefits cut?

on 13/12/2013 16:51:00

Comparative pay

IDS said he could live on £53 a week. Compare this with the £1300 a week the MPs get. Its hard to imagine but if you convert it to heights then when benefits were 2 inches the MPs whack would be 4 feet 2 inches. How can this be fair?

on 13/12/2013 15:18:00

Robin Mabey

You are right to grasp the nettle. Your proposal is long overdue and should go ahead.

on 13/12/2013 08:56:00

Already well paid

Mps are already well paid. That you believe they are not shows the Westminster bubble you are in. Comparison to a gp, or anyone's salary is irrelevant - unless you propose that mps pay should always be attractive a move from any other occupation.

on 13/12/2013 06:50:00

IPSA - Fit for purpose?

Just about everyone in the country is saying this is wrong, including David C, Nick C and Ed M.There is no shortage of people who want to become an MP and many of these are good, decent, hard working and talented, so why increase the pay?

on 12/12/2013 20:45:00


When are you going to listen to the voices of the people of this country - we say NO to MPs getting any pay rise and their expenses should be cut as should their allowance for second homes

on 12/12/2013 20:24:00

Mrs Ann Spence

This is so wrong public opinion is ignored once again as it is with most things. No doubt the ispa has its own agenda

on 12/12/2013 19:07:00


I think it's disgusting. We are not quite over the resession and you want a massive payrise. Us poor people have to suffer and struggle to live, pay bedroom taxi and losing the homes. You Want to be ashamed of yourselfs

on 12/12/2013 18:50:00

Animal farm

Have they read George Orwell's Animal Farm?!

on 12/12/2013 17:30:00

Shame on you All !

How to turn the country against MPs, time to come up with a new democracy ! Shame on you all !

on 12/12/2013 16:30:00


IPSA is a disgrace to this country, the overwhelming greed is perplexing. Surely your job is to listen to the outcry of the country and supposedly the government.

on 12/12/2013 15:34:00

Use these arguments on LOTS of other jobs

And you'll get similar conclusions.A huge number of people have seen their salaries effectively frozen now for years. Do your arguments mean all these people will similarly get huge pay rises? NO!

on 12/12/2013 15:01:00

This never would have gone through whilst Ken Olisa was in charge...

Enough said.

on 12/12/2013 14:58:00

Historic Shortfall

How do I claim an historic shortfall in my wages dating back 34 years. Please send the spplication form.

on 12/12/2013 14:31:00

Think Again

Were the words of David Cameron. Link the pay rises to inflation - the same as in many public service industries OR have a wage freeze - the same as in may public service industries. Pay rises for MP's at this level are simply not justified.

on 12/12/2013 14:29:00

Inde WHAT!

Independent, I don't think so. Lackeys!

on 12/12/2013 14:16:00


Just for starters, how does Ian Kennedy justify his 60000 a year salary as Chair of IPSA for a 2 day a week job? How on earth can he say that this 11% rise for MP's has been approved of by the public?

on 12/12/2013 14:01:00

Cost neutral

You say that you're "sweeping away the overly generous benefits", and then claim "the package of reform is cost neutral".Sounds to me like it's still too generous then.

on 12/12/2013 13:56:00

MP's Pay Award

Thank you IPSA for taking the publics opinion into account when awarding MP's an unjustied pay rise!

on 12/12/2013 13:01:00

MPs Pay

Excuse me - but you forgot to hand your paper in to the court of public opinion.Reconsider or IPSA will be abolished.

on 12/12/2013 12:31:00



on 12/12/2013 12:16:00


I suggest that you do not have the approval of the public. So why not do what the government regularly does to the Civil Service? Stage the increase over a period. Say, 2% per year for four years. And no back pay or interest.

on 12/12/2013 11:45:00

get real

MP's pay is good enough for the job they do!

on 12/12/2013 11:44:00

Christopher Anton

Absolute nonsense. If this is cost neutral then why not leave things as they are. The idea that IPSA is "independent" is a convenient fiction.

on 12/12/2013 11:39:00

Ignoring public opinion

The majority of respondents to your consultation were against a pay increase for MPs, yet you are choosing to proceed with your plans.Why did you bother carrying out a consultation exercise at all, when you ignore the results ?

on 12/12/2013 11:17:00


The mp should not get a pay rise like this so stop it now and should band all expresses as well THIS SO wroung

on 12/12/2013 10:56:00

Add Comment

Items on this list require content approval. Your submission will not appear in public views until approved by someone with proper rights. More information on content approval.