Our View: Pay rises not a good look

Do our city councillors deserve pay rises?
This burning, if not emotional, question is in the spotlight after the people elected to run our city voted to give themselves a 0.8 per cent salary increase this week.
This means ordinary councillors will now earn $74,171.
Councillor pay increases are always controversial and already letters to the editor on the subject have been sent to this media outlet. We elect our city leaders to their positions of power in the belief they are doing it to serve their community first and foremost - not for the salary or expected pay rises it brings.
Councillors spoken to by the Bay of Plenty Times defend their increases, saying the Remunerations Authority decides how much they receive in total and they have no say in the matter other than choosing how to distribute it.
They also believe they deserve the money, with one saying their package should compare with private sector senior managers and another saying the increase is not exactly earth-shattering.
It needs to be pointed out that our councillors cannot be compared with private sector managers. They are elected to govern using public money.
It is not only Tauranga councillors grappling with this issue. Bay of Plenty regional councillors yesterday opted not to take a pay rise, instead choosing to distribute the money awarded by the Remuneration Authority through meeting allowances.
But this is just clouding the issue. In effect, they will still be receiving more money than last year.
There are several issues to consider. In these tough economic times, many ratepayers are suffering - the very people our councillors work for.
There will be a perception, rightly or wrongly, that councillors are automatically getting special treatment and looking after themselves while ratepayers suffer. Businesses, including the city council itself, are also facing financial issues.
In January, this paper reported that Tauranga city's debt was $346 million at the end of December - and would rise to $364 million at the end of June this year.
In 2006 it was $150 million.
There is also a strong case that in difficult economic times pay rises must be earned - not dished out automatically.
But it is almost impossible for ratepayers to truly measure the performance of councillors. The nearest they get is from the reports they read in credible media such as the Bay of Plenty Times.
Questions must also be asked of the Remuneration Authority.
This agency is responsible for annually considering and determining the remuneration and allowances of MPs, the judiciary and certain members and officers of local authorities.
Just how in touch is it with what is happening in the real world? The recent uproar over the government spending millions of dollars to replace its three-year-old fleet of 34 limos with plush new BMWs proves that people do not want their tax dollar spent on luxuries. A similar principle should apply at a local level.
Our councillors do have an option here. Given our city's debt, they should have redirected their pay rises to the city's coffers, or local charities that receive no public money.