text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  MPs salaries - Increase with Public Sector Earnings Index - rejected
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  
  
  
  The majority of MPs voted against the motion:[1]
  
  ** This House notes [http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm74/7416/7416.asp Sir John Baker's Review of Parliamentary Pay and Allowances (Cm 7416)], and is of the opinion that the recommendations in the Review for the annual salary of a Member of this House to be increased by reference to a linkage to the Public Sector Average Earnings Index combined with regular reviews of the salary and the link should be implemented, such that--
  * from 1st April 2008 and from 1st April of each subsequent year a Member's salary should be increased ''by the percentage increase in the 3 month average Public Sector Average Earnings Index for January of that year relative to the figure for January of the previous year;''
  * the SSRB should conduct a review of Members' salaries in the first year of each new Parliament unless such a review has taken place within the preceding two years;
  * an additional salary payable to a Member under Resolutions of this House in respect of service as a chairman of select or general committees should be changed by the same percentage and from the same time as the salary of a Member.
  
  An alternative motion proposed which substituted highlighted section with:[2]
  
  ** ... by an uprating formula which increases the salary by a percentage equal to the median of relevant increases for the following public sector groups: 
  * senior military, 
  * holders of judicial office, 
  * very senior NHS managers, 
  * doctors and dentists, 
  * the Prison Service, 
  * NHS staff, 
  * school teachers, 
  * the Armed Forces, 
  * police officers, 
  * Local Government; 
  * non-Senior Civil Service staff in each of the Department for Work and Pensions, Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs, the Ministry of Defence and the Home Office; and 
  * the Senior Civil Service;
  
  A vote was called for this new motion, but since no Tellers were put forward, the Speaker declared that the Ayes had it without completing the vote.[3]
  
  * [1] [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2008-07-03a.1061.0#g1061.2 Harriet Harman MP], House of Commons, 3 July 2008
  * [2] [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2008-07-03a.1088.0 Hariett Harman MP], House of Commons, 3 July 2008
  * [3] [http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2008-07-03a.1088.0#g1089.2  Mr Speaker], House of Commons, 3 July 2008
  
  
  
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  