Premier Alex Scott challenged the Opposition not to take pay increases if they are so upset with the recommendations from an independent review.

The United Bermuda Party had said hefty hikes in politicians? pay were not justified when there were so many pressing social issues but they indicated they would take them all the same.

Mr. Scott said the UBP had agreed to have an independent body look at the issue but was now quibbling now the report had been made.

The Premier said he was surprised to see criticisms made after the Opposition had voiced support for the report in private meetings ? a claim UBP leader Wayne Furbert denied.

Handing over a review of salaries to an independent body was a tried and tested way other jurisdictions handled such a sensitive matter said Mr. Scott.

Mr. Scott, who now earns $111,714, made up of the current MP?s salary of $39,428 and the Premier?s pay of $72,286, said: ?Believe it or not I am not really in the job for the money, if I was I would be a foolish, foolish man.?

If the report was adopted the Premier?s pay would increase to $200,000 a year, full time ministers would get $150,000 and $100,000 per year if they were part time ? up from $78,856 now.

And MPs would receive a pay hike from $39,428 to $50,000 ? a 26.8 percent pay rise.

The recommendations were contained in the Report of the Ministers and Members of the Legislature Salaries Review Board, which was formed in July, 2005 to review the pay-scales of politicians and make recommendations to make recommendations to bring them in line with politician?s salaries world wide.

The Premier said the Premier and Ministers had to broker high pressure deals for the country but any slip would make the headlines.

Describing the committee which came up with the report as being men of integrity he said criticism from Mr. Furbert amounted to sleight of hand.

If they disagreed they should not accept the pay increase.

Mr. Furbert said the pay increases seemed to be arbitrary with hikes from $39,000 to $50,000. ?That?s nice, why not $45,000, why not $55,000.?

And UBP backbencher Dr. Grant Gibbons supported the amending legislation to set up the Ministers and Members of the Legislature Salaries Review Board Review because it was ?unseemly? to raise one?s own salary. ?Just because we reject the decision of the Board does not mean we reject increase of salaries,? Dr. Gibbons said. ?We must attract good people to serve in the House.

?Just because the Salary Review Board has made a decision does not mean we have to take it,? he said, adding that a current salary of $39,000 for a MP should be increased to $60,000 ? $10,000 higher than the $50,000 recommended in the Report tabled in the House last week.

?We need a redistribution of what was recommended by the Board,? he said. ?We need a bottom-up analysis.?

Dr. Gibbons pointed out the positions of Premier and Cabinet Ministers were chosen from the pool of MPs and as a result, an increased pay-level for the bottom rung of the ladder would make sure the best possible candidates climbed to the top.

However, full-time Cabinet Ministers should make around $120,000 to $125,000, Dr. Gibbons suggested ? around $30,000 less than was recommended than the Board ? while part-time Ministers made $90,000. ?This is below the recommendations of the Board. It keeps the current ratio,? he said. ?It is roughly doubled what MPs make now. But they have more responsibility, plus perks like a car and travel.?

Senators should make $40,000, he said, much more than the $26,000 the Board recommended. He said MPs were not necessarily those of the highest merit or ability but were chosen by the Premier for their key constituency or to achieve a political balance.

The Premier should make $180,000, he said ? $20,000 less than the Board recommended.

?On the face of it the Board have given Cabinet what they were looking for,? he said. ?I don?t believe it will achieve what is needed.?

In any event, he said, the pay rise should not take place until after the next election and the position of Finance Minister should definitely be a full-time position.

?The Minister of Finance ought not to have any other job,? Dr. Gibbons said. ?We need a clearly defined code of conduct for MPs.?

Shadow Attorney General and Minister of Legislative Affairs & Justice Trevor Moniz said that the last pay increase for Parliamentarians was in 1994.

The sacrifices that all MPs make, even backbenchers, was getting greater and greater, Mr. Moniz said. ?This is a 24 hour job,? Mr. Moniz said. ?You are always on duty.?

But the ultimate judge of how well an MP was doing in their job was the electorate, he said.

?We all feel hard done by,? Mr. Moniz said. ?It is a very difficult topic. I hold myself to critique what was done by the Board. They did not have time available to properly deal with subject. They had some five six months to consider the matter.?

The Board did not interview every active politician in Bermuda, he said, but only the Premier, ten Cabinet members and a ?smaller number? of Parliamentarians and Senators. ?There was weighting going on,? he said. ?Maybe it would have been better to interview everyone.?

Not even Speaker of the House Stanley Lowe OBE, who Mr. Moniz said had a very weighty position in the House, was interviewed, he said, which set a dangerous precedent for future MP pay rises. ?We want to get it right. We don?t just want to march in there,? he said.

Mr. Moniz called the Report of the Ministers and Members of the Legislature Salaries Review Board ?bogus? because it also did not look at political pensions.

And sums proposed for some politicians were miserly, he said.

Bermuda needed a Parliamentary Ombudsman for times like this, he said ? ?Arlene Brock would be the ideal person to look at the proceedings.?