Trust and Remuneration: Conclusion

Tackling these challenges requires an approach that balances providing MPs with the things they need to deliver for the people and assuring those citizens that MPs are motivated to serve the people first and foremost. This concluding section offers recommendations for remuneration reform, keeping these often-competing needs in mind. The following practices may not all be feasible in each place at a given time. However, if opportunities for reform present themselves, they may help build a virtuous cycle of transparent, responsive remuneration for and earned trust in elected officials.

Ensure reasonable remuneration that is responsive to economic and other pressures. Remuneration packages should be sufficient to cover personal needs so elected officials are not driven to corrupt or “unofficial” methods to make ends meet. They should also be responsive to a country’s economic situation – including inflation, cost of living, and exogenous crises. For instance, reducing expenditures for elected officials is a reasonable policy when a country imposes austerity measures and shows an awareness of and solidarity with citizens who may be experiencing economic troubles in their own lives. If there is no schedule for reviewing remuneration packages against trending economic data, impose a regular assessment. This kind of review and revision process stands to improve perceptions of the ways in which elected officials recognize citizens’ needs. For example, Denmark established mechanisms for annual assessments of remuneration packages for public officials that consider factors such as inflation and economic growth.¹³³ By demonstrating a proactive approach to addressing economic challenges through flexible remuneration policies, governments can foster greater public trust and confidence in the fairness of elected officials’ compensation, in turn reinforcing public confidence in the integrity of those officials.

Keep the public informed about remuneration practices and, importantly, any changes to them. Complete information about remuneration packages is difficult to find in most countries. Strategic communications training can improve outreach and increase citizens’ awareness about remuneration provisions for elected officials, especially when institutions consult experts and members of civil society about changing remuneration packages. This might include utilizing social and traditional media so institutions can communicate more effectively with their constituents. For example, Croatia makes all elected officials’ income and asset declarations public information, which has led to extensive media coverage of suspected conflicts of interest.¹³⁴ When changes are made – whether in response to crises, economic circumstances, or public comment – these should be communicated through effective citizen outreach campaigns. By engaging with both traditional and social media platforms, governments can effectively communicate with constituents and foster greater transparency and accountability in remuneration policies.

Require asset and income disclosure to increase transparency around officials’ earnings. Asset disclosure as a practice is known “to prevent corruption and to help strengthen integrity in public administration” – both of which are key to improving levels of democratic trust.¹³⁵ Indeed, a majority of Sri Lanka Survey respondents (68 percent) said increased transparency around remuneration would improve their confidence in elected officials, addressing the first challenge, above. The introduction of a new system or reforms should also include sufficient and appropriate enforcement methods. Asset and income disclosure policies present natural opportunities for greater transparency – supported by successful outreach in the form of civic education and public service messaging in the media. All of these can positively impact constituents’ views of their elected officials. For instance, Singapore has stringent asset disclosure requirements for public officials, supported by robust enforcement mechanisms.¹³⁶ By adopting similar practices and conducting public outreach campaigns to educate citizens about the importance of asset and income disclosure, governments can enhance transparency and strengthen public confidence in elected officials.

Limit benefits extended to officials’ family members and prohibit nepotism. These limitations should be outlined in specific laws and regulations and clearly linked to specific sanctions. While such regulations cannot be expected to completely deter individuals who choose to violate them, any allegations of nepotism should be fully investigated and verified instances should be met with appropriate punishment. Additionally, to address pervasive issues of nepotism and favoritism, policymakers should consider implementing comprehensive reforms that promote transparency and meritocracy in staff selection processes. For instance, the United States has implemented stringent regulations to prevent nepotism and ensure transparency in staff selection processes at both the federal and the state levels.¹³⁷ Implementing such changes might involve tasking independent oversight bodies with monitoring recruitment procedures and ensuring compliance with established guidelines. Furthermore, training programs and workshops could be organized to educate elected officials and their staff about ethical conduct and the importance of impartiality in personnel matters. By adopting similar measures and enforcing strict penalties for violations, governments can strengthen public trust and confidence in the impartiality of public service recruitment.

Limit unnecessary international travel and manage perceptions. Given the sprawling, informal travel-related benefits afforded to elected officials, decision-makers should weigh the necessity of travel (especially out-of-country travel) against the perception issues that accompany it. For instance, trainings offered by international partners should be hosted locally, when possible, to avoid the perception that they are excuses for international travel. Any necessary foreign travel should be considered carefully given the perception issues that may ensue. Virtual options should also be considered, given the connectivity possible today. Reducing travel will naturally reduce informal travel benefits, which could reassure the public that officials are traveling for the right reasons. For example, Norway has implemented strict guidelines for international travel by public officials, emphasizing the importance of accountability and cost-effectiveness.¹³⁸ By adopting similar policies and exploring virtual alternatives for international engagements – while also balancing the (often intangible) benefits of occasional foreign travel – governments can mitigate perception issues and enhance public trust in the responsible use of public funds.