Skip to content

OPINION: Bashing politicians’ pay is unproductive

One issue that unites taxpayers like no other is a collective hatred of having to pay any city politician or bureaucrat a single nickel.
city hall

One issue that unites taxpayers like no other is a collective hatred of having to pay any city politician or bureaucrat a single nickel.

One of the most-read stories online for the Record this year has been a list of the top salaries of New Westminster’s city staffers.

Taxpayers see city staffers making money – perhaps more than they do – and their blood boils. And if they see anything in New Westminster that isn’t perfect, they rail about how these “overpaid” bureaucrats and politicians aren’t good enough to deserve their tax dollars.

It’s this attitude aspiring civic politicians try to exploit by criticizing such salaries.

Case in point, the New Westminster Progressive Electors Coalition, which is calling for an end to a remuneration policy that sees outgoing members of council receive retirement pay.

The city’s current policy, in place since 2010, awards the mayor and council with 10 per cent of their annual compensation for each year on council in one-time separation allowances, up to a maximum of 12 years if they choose to leave or are not re-elected.

Progressives council candidate Daniel Fontaine said the funds should be spent on something else.

“We think when taxpayers look at these types of pension payouts for city council positions, they look around and they see roads that aren’t well-maintained, they see open ditches in Queensborough, they see services that are not in their community,” Fontaine told the Record.

Sure, I guess that money could be spent elsewhere.

Then again, how much are we talking about? According to the time served by the current council, it would cost $226,000. But that’s only if all of them either quit or were voted out of office on Oct. 20.

Meanwhile, the city’s budget is $124 million.

You see, it’s a pittance, but hey, it always sounds good to bash what politicians make so you’ll look like a big hero.

An independent, arm’s-length review of council compensation recommended the separation allowances because councillors do not receive a pension or retirement benefits like other city employees.

Remember, you might not like the job council is doing, but it’s still a job. Technically, they are city employees.

This is the crux of the situation. Voters demand the best, most diverse people get elected to run their city. These people have to commit to four years and put up with having their characters assassinated on a daily basis. Meanwhile, don’t you dare expect any kind of wage increase or retirement payout for your years of service or we’re going to savage you for exploiting taxpayers.

I’m not arguing for the payouts. I’m just tired of this cartoon attitude that they are some outrageous waste of money.

All it does is degrade people’s view of civic leaders and scare off qualified folks from ever vying for public office because few want to get treated this way.

Follow Chris Campbell @shinebox44