Pay for politicians is back in the news, this time it's our MPPs who are walking through this minefield.

At issue, is the recent Report of the Speaker's Commission on Members' Compensation. Drafted by three handpicked consultants in less than a month, this report urges an immediate 33% pay increase for MPPs which would hike their salaries from $77,541 to $110,541.

At 110K per year, this would put MPPs in the top 2% of all income earners in Ontario according to the latest available federal tax data.

To be fair, Section 75.1 of the Legislative Assembly Act allows the Speaker to appoint a commission to review MPP pay. And yes, recent history shows that our MPPs have done some good things when it comes to their paycheques. In 1995, all Cabinet Ministers took a symbolic pay cut while the Province was still in a fiscal deficit situation. And in 1996, the Harris Tories did away with the tax-free component of MPP salaries and reformed a very offensive (read: rich) pension plan with a more equitable group RRSP scheme.

But this report is simply beyond belief. A week after a poverty riot on the lawn in front of Queen's Park, one has to question the political judgment and wisdom in releasing it now, during the last week of the spring legislative session.

Moreover, the symbolism of a proposed 33% pay hike for the "governors" while they negotiate single-digit multi-year pay packages with their unionized employees surely does not strengthen the government's bargaining position in said negotiations.

Whenever it comes to pay for our politicians, proponents of big-time pay raises for elected officials always trot out the same spurious arguments. Politicians are underpaid compared to their private sector counterparts. Elected representatives are away from their families for extended periods of time and this causes great family strain. And my personal favourite, hey, these folks work 12 to 16 hour days and are always in the public eye.

Well to begin, there is no private sector comparison for public life because public life does not enforce the same private sector discipline. If it did, federal HRDC Minister Jane Stewart would have been fired already. If it did, former NDP Finance Minister Floyd Laughren wouldn't have been allowed to deliver five horrendous budgets.

Turning to the family strains, there is no doubt that elected office presents challenges for a marriage. And yes, divorce and marriage breakdown is very high in political circles. But no one forces people to place their names on a ballot and hopefully, they go into public life with a great deal of deliberative forethought. This also holds true for the unending public scrutiny/availability issue. People should know what they're getting into from the outset.

And we mustn't forget the "if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys" school of thought for political compensation. Yet, there exists no credible study on the face of the planet which concludes that better pay equals better politicians. Yes we want to pay people fairly and adequately for their work. But the drivers of influence, opportunity, power and prestige motivate people to seek elected office, not money.

The government should scrap the Speaker's report, it is shallow, poorly researched and sends all the wrong messages to taxpayers. Instead, a truly independent commission should be established with a six-month time frame to seek broad public input, build on other studies done in various jurisdictions and report back to the legislature. Then and only then should MPPs address this issue and once they come to a conclusion, the pay changes voted in should only come into force for the next legislative session, thereby removing the inherent conflict of interest in setting your own pay.