There has been much talk recently about how the country needs to be run like a business. In some sense, this has merit. For example, the recently instituted use of Cost-Benefit analysis to evaluate policy is a positive step. Tax dollars don’t come from nowhere; they come from the pockets of hardworking Kiwis. They should be spent wisely. 

There’s also been a lot of talk about how MPs’ salaries haven’t increased for six and a half years. During this time, there’s been a cost-of-living crisis (which could be said to have been created by MPs; that’s another story). However, wages generally rose by 28% over the same period.

You’d apply the same logic to MPs’ salaries, right?

The purpose of having elected representatives is for them to serve the public interest, not to enrich themselves.

I’m not so sure that the business argument works here. This view fails to acknowledge the unique nature of what our MPs do. They’re not CEOs or businesspeople presiding over a workforce; they are public servants representing the various interests of the nation for our communal good. They work for us, not the other way around.

But, if you pay peanuts, some argue, don’t you get monkeys?

Possibly, but not always. Think of MPs such as Christopher Luxon, Dan Bidois, or Nicole McKee, who’ve come from the private sector and are taking a pay cut. Moreover, the purpose of having elected representatives is for them to serve the public interest, not to enrich themselves. If MP salaries are made overly lucrative and competitive with top private sector jobs, it creates incentives misaligned with public service.

At the heart of this issue lies a broader concern: the growing chasm between the political class and the citizens they represent.

Critics may argue that modest salaries could open the door to corruption and undue influence. But our country is routinely held up as a beacon of probity. Also, I’m not sure I would call a base salary of $163,961 a year “modest.” We must also acknowledge the perks and privileges that already accompany the role of an MP, from travel allowances ($320 per day) and expense accounts (starting at $7,000) to accommodation subsidies (starting at $36,400). When combined with a reasonable salary, these benefits should provide a comfortable standard of living without fostering a sense of entitlement or detachment from the realities ordinary New Zealanders face.

At the heart of this issue lies a broader concern: the growing chasm between the political class and the citizens they represent. Commentator Josie Pagani has pointed out that there is now a “class divide” between those in the house and those out of it, with one hundred per cent of our politicians coming from the “professional and managerial class.”

So, is being an MP a mere transaction where compensation rules? Or is the job a higher calling… that’s the $163,000 question.

Compare that to the 1970s, when 20% of our MPs were from the trades. Now, there are none. At that time, an MP’s salary was comparable to that of a secondary school teacher ($14,097, including allowances vs $12,370).

We risk cultivating a homogeneous governing elite disconnected from the diverse perspectives and experiences that shape our nation.

So, is being an MP a mere transaction where compensation rules? Or is the job a higher calling, a trust bestowed upon those who hope to improve the lives of its citizens? That’s the $163,000 question.