THE Bermuda Industrial Union is backing planned pay rises for MPs, claiming that politicians deserve the controversial hikes.

But BIU leader Chris Furbert acknowledged that the increases ? which will see Premier Alex Scott's salary package jump a massive 80 per cent to $200,000 ? should be phased in over several years to soften their impact.

At a press conference yesterday, Mr. Furbert said the new salaries were recommended by an independent committee which did a thorough job comparing salaries in other jurisdictions before making its recommendation.

And he added that, as the island's "Commander in Chief", Mr. Scott should earn a bigger salary than anyone in the Civil Service.

Listing the eight members of the salary review board, Mr. Furbert said: "We all should agree that this board was made up of a group of highly professional men and women with vast experience in both the public and private sector.

"Are those who are criticising the recommendations of this board suggesting that these men and women could be unduly influenced by the Premier?

"Clearly, if members of the public had read the report which was tabled in Parliament in February 2006, they would see that this group of professionals had looked at salaries of members of the legislature in other countries large and small, examined the increase in cost of living since the last pay adjustment and completed other research before coming up with their conclusions.

"The proposed benchmark for salaries for members of the legislature is a recommendation from the aforementioned board, not by the Progressive Labour Party Government, as many people have stated and many others believe.

"The Bermuda Industrial Union believes that with the positions of Premier, Cabinet Ministers and indeed Members of Parliament, comes grave responsibility, not only locally but globally, and these positions should be respected by all in the community. Hence it is our belief that the salary increases are warranted, however I believe the increase should be phased in over the next two years."

Mr. Furbert denied that, as a member of the Progressive Labour Party, he was simply toeing the party line and he also dismissed fears that the increases will have an adverse effect on the pension fund, saying that the rises affected a few dozen salaries and pensions, not thousands.

"The Minister of Finance is going to take a look at that but we are talking about 36 individuals ? that's not going to put that much strain on the pension fund of this country."

And he also stressed that the endorsement by the blue collar union should not open the floodgates for demands for similar increases.

"It may cause us some challenges in the future but each case for an upgrade in wages must be treated on its own merits," he said.

Mr. Furbert was assisted by former Government senator and civil servant Calvin Smith who pointed out that the duties of political office had grown greatly over the years.

"The Governor used to run the show but his duties have been diminished tremendously but the Premier seems to be the least regarded person of all," Mr. Smith said.

"I think this is wrong and I think the men and women who made the recommendation for these salary increases realised it was wrong and they have tried to adjust it."

But last night Shadow Finance Minister Patricia Gordon-Pamplin questioned the board, pointing out that it acknowledged its limitations and did not examine implications of the pay rises such as pensions.

She added that the fact that the increases were "top heavy", with the Premier and Cabinet Ministers getting a bigger raise than backbenchers, Opposition MPs and senators, implied that the board was under pressure to recommend the demands

"How thorough was their process when in fact they interviewed ten Cabinet Ministers and the Premier ? hence the apparent pressure for them to respond to the representations made by those members," Mrs. Gordon Pamplin said.

"The allocation of the recommendations reflected what appears to be Cabinet pressure. It is interesting to note that one particular Cabinet Minister informed me that he thought that $100,000 was an appropriate amount for Ministers, and he was astounded to see such a large increase being recommended.

"Notwithstanding that the Union believes that our 'Commander-in-Chief' deserves a pay rise, I believe that the Union president has an ulterior motive with this show of support, in that his own negotiations with Government may be able to reap better rewards if he is seen to be co-operative.

"I hope, though, that he will be able to explain to his membership that when the pension fund dries up from the unfunded liabilities, that his membership, along with the rest of the tax-paying public, will be required to meet the shortfall, and when there is little money left over for Union dues, I hope he is equally supportive.

"Support for a policy that has been ill-thought through, that appears to be personal aggrandisement and avarice hardly bode well for any economy. Perhaps the Union president ought to consider consultation with his counterparts at the Public Service Union and the Employers' Council who have shown a deeper understanding of the issue than a shallow statement that the Commander in Chief deserves this type of remuneration."