Re: P.M. downplays salary cut
Loved the way Stui makes the connection between reduced revenue collections and his pay cut. That is a brilliant strategy.
Now those of us who are campaigning for church ministers not to pay taxes will be partly blamed for the $5,000 reduction in the PM’s salary.
I don’t buy this argument though.
As one of my friends at the makeki puts it, the relationship between revenue collections and salary fluctuation is not straightforward. Salaries have sometimes increased even when revenue collections decrease because the government can reshuffle priorities and either postpones or cut expenditure elsewhere to fund pay rises.
It is unusual for salaries to decrease at any time.
Should the government’s position be dire because of a fall in revenue collections, it can reduce discretionary spending such as travel, overtime, etc but not salaries. Can you imagine the outcry if all the Ministers/Associate Ministers and C.E.O’s were asked to reduce their respective salaries by around 3% (the percentage reduction in the PM’s salary) due to a reduction in revenues? It will be a great idea and music to the ears of the ordinary punters. But it is not going to happen any time soon.
If there is any connection between revenue collections and salaries then those C.E.O’s and Ministers who collect the most revenue should be paid more than others.
But this is not the case as salary levels are based on a number of factors and revenue collections is not one of them, as I have been told.
What is the real reason for the reduction in Stui’s pay packet? We shall never know and we also will never know when his salary will pick up again?