AT the same time as our Members of Parliament are seeking further perks and privileges, their colleagues in Britain have been doing likewise.
But that’s where the coincidence ends.
For unlike Papua New Guinea where approval for the extra K25 million or so is virtually a foregone conclusion, the scenario in the UK is very different.
Gordon Brown, the Labour parliamentarian who last year replaced his fellow party member Tony Blair as British prime minister, appears to have an unequivocal view on the matter.
He has told Parliament that both British ministers and Members should have pay rises of less than 2%.
The salary increase decision will be made by Members of the House of Commons, but the prime minister’s view is traditionally regarded as important.
Mr Brown has urged Members to support a pay rise that will keep them in line with other public sector workers such as police and nurses.
He added that Members of the House should “demonstrate the discipline that we ask of other people”.
The Senior Salaries Pay Board has reportedly recommended a 2.8% salaries increase based on an ordinary Member’s salary.
Prime minister Brown was quoted as saying: “We must show exactly the same discipline that we ask of other people. In fact, the recommendations for significant pay rises will be rejected and I think it’s very important that we send that message to nurses, police and all those other people in the public sector.”
There was another curious echo of the PNG situation and it came from the powerful union lobby.
Brendan Barber, general secretary of the Trades Union Congress, warned Mr Brown that public sector pay should stay in line with inflation.
He said there was a danger of disputes in the public services.
“The six million people who deliver our public services, they’re voters too and the story they tell ... about what’s happening in their public services, is a very important contributor to the wider public mood,” he said.
“So, if the atmosphere in the public services is of discontent, and disarray and disillusionment, that’s not going to do the government any political favours at all.”
Comments from our own TUC and from other major union organisations have told much the same story.
The major difference between the UK and PNG lies in the level of guidance issued to Members by their prime minister. He warned them of the dangers of inflation if massive increases were to be granted and he noted that discontent from the police, nurses and other public service groups would be virtually inevitable.
We can recall no similar statements being made by PNG prime ministers on the previous occasions when salary increases for members of the PNG Parliament had been mooted.
There has been an outspoken and almost universally negative response by the public to the latest demands for increased parliamentary allowances and salaries.
Granted that PNG is clawing its way out of the economic disasters that nearly destroyed our country at the end of the past century, the people of PNG are certainly not yet in the mood for congratulatory hikes in salaries and allowances on the part of our Members.
Quite the contrary; the public is still waiting for many of our leaders to demonstrate even a token gesture of self-sacrifice or willingness to put up with some of the privations faced by the rest of us.
That being the case, we would expect those who lead our current Government to speak out strongly against any and all of the projected rises in the across-the-board form they have been proposed.
We acknowledge and agree with Transparency International that the Public Accounts Committee faced serious financial difficulties in carrying out its functions last year.
But we don’t see that as a justification for plumping the pillows of the rest of the sleeping mass of the balance of Parliament’s committee members.
If the most senior members of our Government were to speak out and warn our Members of the outcomes of yet another salary hike, PNG might benefit first from the money saved – and secondly, from such an unexpected display of leadership.