Premier Alex Scott?s annual pay packet is one step closer to shooting up 80 percent to $200,000 after the Government voted itself a hefty salary hike yesterday.

Under the plans ? which will now go before the Senate ? full-time Ministers would collect $150,000, with their part-time counterparts paid $100,000, up from $78,856 now. All pay awards would be backdated to April 1 this year.

Mr. Scott moved to distance himself from the large increases for senior Ministers during the debate, stressing again that politicians did not negotiate their own rises.

But a war of words broke out in the House of Assembly as the Opposition laid into Government for backing the ?top loaded? hikes, amid accusations that the knock-on impact of salary increases on pension contributions would hit taxpayers in the pocket.

When it came to the vote on Mr. Scott?s Draft Resolution stemming from a Salaries Review Board report, Government narrowly won. With the voting on party lines, 16 Progressive Labour Party MPs gave the pay rise the green light with 13 United Bermuda Party MPs voting against.

A number of key figures were absent including Opposition Deputy Leader Michael Dunkley, Deputy Premier Ewart Brown, Minister of Community Affairs Dale Butler, Education Minister Terry Lister and Minister of National Drug Control Wayne Perinchief.

Mr. Scott, opening what was often a heated debate on the controversial wage issue, restated that a Salaries Review Board recommended the increases in February.

?Members of the House did not have a hand in determining the details of the resolution,? he said, adding that Bermuda was not ?rediscovering the wheel? and was following in the footsteps of other countries.

The Premier revealed that ten members of his Cabinet would be classed as full-time, with three working part-time. Although he did not reveal any names, Finance Minister Paula Cox ? a lawyer who works as corporate counsel at Ace Ltd. ? revealed during the debate that she had opted to be paid on a part-time basis ?even though I consider myself to be more than a full-time Minister.?

Mr. Scott had touched on this, saying that full-time Ministers would be expected to be ?fully engaged? with their ministerial duties, and said that part-time ones would continue to juggle other responsibilities. He said it would be too much to expect part-time Ministers to ?uproot livelihoods in midstream?, but added that the aim was to make all Ministers full-time after the next election.

Opposition Leader Wayne Furbert said the calculations were ?arbitrary? and added: ?This is more about rewarding Cabinet Ministers and the Premier?, triggering an argument between both sides of the House about whether the recommendations had been forwarded by Government or the salaries board.

Mr. Furbert asked the Premier to name who the full time and part time Ministers would be ? and questioned why the impact on pensions was not raised.

Opposition Whip John Barritt accused Mr. Scott of hiding behind the report, which he said gave ?eight pieces of gold? to the Premier and Cabinet and ?four pieces of silver? to the rest.

He said that the board, outlining the costs of the new wages, had recommended phasing the changes in stages.

He also said the board said the increases would have a major impact on the public purse, and called for Finance Minister Paula Cox to discuss the impact on pensions. Mr. Barritt said a 2003 actuarial review showed that the deficiency in the MPs? pension fund was more than $4 million, and it had been stated that politicians? contributions should rise by 15 percent from 12.5 per cent to ?rescue? the fund.

He added: ?If we already have a fund that the actuary is telling us is seriously underfunded in terms of money set aside, we are creating an even bigger and more serious problem if we now raise the salaries and we do not do anything with regard to contributions.?

Comparing the pay rises to a ?smash and grab?, he said the increases had to be part of a bigger plan, otherwise it ?looks like we just are looking after ourselves?.

Earlier, Mr. Scott said the wage review panel consisted of an accountant, lawyer, judge, former MP and a respected economist and that both political parties were represented. As he read the list of proposed increases, which would also see MPs wages jump from $39,428 to $50,000, there were cries from the Opposition benches of ?shame? and ?disgusting?. In response, Mr. Scott said he was worried about the future of volunteerism in the community if that was the reaction to the board?s proposals.

The Premier said there was no fixed formula for working out the salaries, but they had been based on ?fairness and reasonableness?. The board had also taken into account countries like the Bahamas, Cayman Islands, Jamaica, Australia and the UK, and looked at senior civil servant wages and the rising cost of living. The yardstick for a full-time minister?s work was a 35-hour week.