Party leaders have been warned not to interfere in an independent ruling on MPs' pay, due next week.
Parliament's expenses watchdog is expected to recommend a rise from ?66,000 to more than ?70,000 in 2015.
David Cameron has said such a rise would be "unthinkable" and Nick Clegg said he would not take one.
But Ipsa boss Sir Ian Kennedy said there was "no opting in or out" and political leaders should accept "you do not tell the regulator what to do".
He said putting off "hard decisions" on MPs' pay was what caused the 2009 expenses scandal - which led to Ipsa's creation. He said he wanted to remind "everyone, including leading politicians, that Ipsa was created by Parliament to effect a clean break with the past"
Sir Ian did not say what Ipsa (the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority) would recommend, but confirmed its proposals would be published next Thursday.
"Of course, this is not a good time to be talking about the pay element of the package, save to notice that in the public sector pay increases are limited to 1% a year," he said.
"But given that there has never been a good time, this is as good a time as ever.
"Moreover, we know what happens when the element of pay is pushed aside as being simply too hard - the nods and winks school of public financing emerges, and ultimately we end up with circumstances like 2009.
"No-one wanted the system that brought Parliament to its knees in 2009 to come into being, but it was the inevitable result of hard decisions deferred."
The prime minister said any rise for MPs "would be unthinkable unless the cost of politics was frozen" . His Lib Dem deputy Mr Clegg said he would not take a big pay rise, even if one were recommended, as people struggling with rising costs and pay freezes would find it "impossible to understand".
But many backbenchers, on lower salaries than ministers, have long believed they are underpaid compared with other professions and their pay has been held down for political reasons for years.
A Downing Street spokesman said: "The prime minister set out his position at the weekend and that position hasn't changed. Ipsa is independent. They are due to report shortly on the issue.
BBC News - MPs' pay: Party leaders told not to interfere
Whatever way you look at it
1) Fiddling your expenses gets you a pay rise
2) You get a pay rise well above the pay restraint that is on other public sector workers (which MP's are, whether they like it or not)
3) Fraud and theft do pay, and pay well.
Easy for Dave to say "No" when he knows the greedy MP's will take it anyway, so he will get it no matter what he says.
Moral of the story, fiddle your expenses, keep everyone's pay rise down and get yourself a nice chunky pay rise instead...
Parliament's expenses watchdog is expected to recommend a rise from ?66,000 to more than ?70,000 in 2015.
David Cameron has said such a rise would be "unthinkable" and Nick Clegg said he would not take one.
But Ipsa boss Sir Ian Kennedy said there was "no opting in or out" and political leaders should accept "you do not tell the regulator what to do".
He said putting off "hard decisions" on MPs' pay was what caused the 2009 expenses scandal - which led to Ipsa's creation. He said he wanted to remind "everyone, including leading politicians, that Ipsa was created by Parliament to effect a clean break with the past"
Sir Ian did not say what Ipsa (the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority) would recommend, but confirmed its proposals would be published next Thursday.
"Of course, this is not a good time to be talking about the pay element of the package, save to notice that in the public sector pay increases are limited to 1% a year," he said.
"But given that there has never been a good time, this is as good a time as ever.
"Moreover, we know what happens when the element of pay is pushed aside as being simply too hard - the nods and winks school of public financing emerges, and ultimately we end up with circumstances like 2009.
"No-one wanted the system that brought Parliament to its knees in 2009 to come into being, but it was the inevitable result of hard decisions deferred."
The prime minister said any rise for MPs "would be unthinkable unless the cost of politics was frozen" . His Lib Dem deputy Mr Clegg said he would not take a big pay rise, even if one were recommended, as people struggling with rising costs and pay freezes would find it "impossible to understand".
But many backbenchers, on lower salaries than ministers, have long believed they are underpaid compared with other professions and their pay has been held down for political reasons for years.
A Downing Street spokesman said: "The prime minister set out his position at the weekend and that position hasn't changed. Ipsa is independent. They are due to report shortly on the issue.
BBC News - MPs' pay: Party leaders told not to interfere
Whatever way you look at it
1) Fiddling your expenses gets you a pay rise
2) You get a pay rise well above the pay restraint that is on other public sector workers (which MP's are, whether they like it or not)
3) Fraud and theft do pay, and pay well.
Easy for Dave to say "No" when he knows the greedy MP's will take it anyway, so he will get it no matter what he says.
Moral of the story, fiddle your expenses, keep everyone's pay rise down and get yourself a nice chunky pay rise instead...
Comment