Michael Johnson (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am pleased to continue my presentation in the parliament today. It was interrupted on a previous occasion. Let me resume where I finished off—that is, at the point of totally repudiating the member for Wills in his presentation to the parliament. The amendment that he suggested is of course fanciful and ought to be rejected by this House, without any doubt at all. Like a lumbering dinosaur over there, the federal Labor Party continues to be stuck in the prehistoric age. It continues to fight old battles, old wars and old issues while the coalition government is moving on into the 21st century.

We are talking about water conservation—$2 billion over five years to establish the Australian water fund. We are talking about record spending in health. We are talking about aged care funding going up substantially to $45 billion, up from $20 billion when we came into office. We are talking about workforce participation, getting more people into work—young people, mature people and those with disabilities who still have the capacity to work. We are talking at the COAG meeting about committing $660 million to improve the health of Australians who are suffering from mental health issues and related issues. So we are on about the business of government.

We were elected to govern. We were elected in 2004 for the fourth occasion in succession because the people of Australia invested very strongly in their future. In the meantime, as the member for Wills and most of his colleagues on the other side reflect in their presentations, they are only in the business of dealing with the past. The issues of Iraq and issues of weapons of mass destruction that the member for Wills went on about are completely irrelevant to the Australian people at this time. We have had that debate. We have had a referendum in the most important forum of this country—that is, in the public arena. The electorate voted. They voted very strongly. They voted very decisively. I was delighted to have an increase in my vote, as I am sure that the minister at the table, the new Minister for Education, Science and Training, had in her vote. That reflects the people’s preferences about the policy focus in this parliament.

Albeit very briefly, I must absolutely repudiate the charge by the member for Wills that this government is engaged in hard-core, deep corruption through the Australian Wheat Board matters that are being currently aired. We reject that absolutely. We repudiate it. The Cole inquiry has been set up by the government. As the Prime Minister and senior ministers have said, let that commission pan out. Let it deliberate, and then the debate can start, following its report.

Most importantly, in this parliament, this government is on about the state of the national economy. The people of Australia and the people of my electorate want to know what we are doing about schools, universities, hospitals and health care, transport and the highways, byways and freeways of this country. That is what this government is focusing on. Let me give an example in relation to the economy. Unemployment in this country is at three-decade lows under this government. Interest rates remain very low, so families in the Ryan electorate can afford to purchase their own homes again, after struggling under the burden of interest rates which peaked under Labor at record levels of 17 or 18 per cent.

We all know that the budget is in surplus, to the tune of $8.9 billion, in stark contrast with when Labor was in office and left us with a massive deficit. Our focus is on issues that are important to the people of Australia—for example, providing $100 million to an energy technology fund to finance solutions and new ideas for the challenge of the abatement of greenhouse gas emissions. These are the things that matter to everyday people in Ryan. These are the things that matter to everyday Australians the length and breadth of this country. While it is not my place to counsel the opposition—and certainly not the shadow minister, the member for Wills—I would encourage them to focus on policies and issues that matter to the Australian people.

I will continue from where I left off—I had to rebuke and repudiate the inferences by the shadow minister—by saying that this bill this is an important one. It provides a significant amendment to the Ministers of State Act 1952. This act allows for the appropriation of government revenue for payment of ministerial salaries and determines the maximum number of ministers of state.

The remuneration of members and senators is set out in section 48 of the Constitution. Section 66 sets out additional payments for ministers of the state by virtue of their position and office. The Remuneration Tribunal, empowered by the Remuneration Tribunal Act 1973, is required to report to the government annually on the salaries of members and senators and also on the additional salary payable to ministers. The additional salary payable to ministers is expressed as a percentage of the annual allowance.

The tribunal’s report No. 1 of 2005 made no changes to the percentage of annual additional allowance for ministers. Previously, however, the tribunal had recommended that the annual allowance for senators and members be linked to a reference salary under the Principal Executive Office, or PEO, Classification Structure. The government created this link in the Remuneration and Allowances Regulations 2005. The PEO was adjusted on 1 July 2005 following a determination by the Remuneration Tribunal. This had a flow-on effect and increased the annual allowance to members and senators and additional salary for ministers of the state.

Currently the Ministers of State Act 1952 limits to $2.8 million the amount that can be appropriated from the consolidated revenue fund to cover the additional salaries of ministers. This amendment bill increases that limit to $3.2 million to cover the increase in the additional payment to ministers and to allow some latitude for future increases. So it is an important provision, expanding the figure from $2.8 million to $3.2 million.

This allows me an opportunity to comment on the salary structure of members of parliament, senators, ministers and the Prime Minister. I have had the privilege of being the federal representative for Ryan, covering parts of the city of Brisbane, for four years. From time to time constituents and other residents talk about the salaries of members of parliament—from the Prime Minister down to a member of this parliament who holds no office. They are on the public record—it is all available, and it is transparent. Any citizen of this country can find out the salaries of members of parliament. I want to say in the parliament today that I think an overwhelming number of members and senators of this parliament are paid appropriately for their work but perhaps there is scope for that to be re-examined. Certainly every member of this parliament works very hard and is very dedicated in their contributions to this parliament and to this country. That is the nature of our profession.

As the Prime Minister touched on in question time the other day, I think all of us should stand firm, shoulder to shoulder, when our profession is denigrated and the media or individuals in the community take it upon themselves to ‘bash’ members of parliament, their work and their salaries. It is very easy to be a passenger in life and to criticise the hard work of people in politics from the sidelines, but I think it is a noble profession. Many of us on this side of the parliament, including the minister at the table, could earn far more outside this parliament. However, none of us comes into this place for reasons of profit. We come into this parliament because we love this country. We are deeply proud Australians, and we want to make a contribution to the future of our land and the generations of Australians to come. Most of us have children or grandchildren. We are no different from the rest of this country in terms of our love of this land and wanting to improve it.

I thought it might be of interest to my colleagues, to those who might be listening and to those in my electorate of Ryan to get an understanding of the salary structure of members of parliament in comparison with others in our community. Let me give some examples of some of the better known figures in Australia who receive substantial amounts of money for the work that they do. I refer to an article in the BRW magazine of 15 December 2005 about the salaries of certain high-profile individuals. According to the article, Cate Blanchett, a very fine Australian actress, earns $13 million per annum. Kylie Minogue receives $6 million. The great Rove McManus earns some $5.5 million. Eddie Maguire, who is from Victoria and is well known throughout the country from his time on television, earns $3.5 million—no doubt that will increase with his rise to the rank of CEO of the Nine Network. Megan Gale, a model, earns some $3 million. I am sure that Shannon Noll, for his talent, deserves every bit of the $1.4 million that he receives in his pay packet. The list includes sportsmen and sportswomen, either in a playing capacity or a coaching capacity. Cyclist Stuart O’Grady receives $1 million a year. The Essendon football coach, Kevin Sheedy, earns $600,000. Basketball player Lauren Jackson earns $200,000.

Turning to businesspeople, Mr Chip Goodyear, CEO of BHP Billiton, receives $5.38 million; Gail Kelly, the Chief Executive Officer of the St George Bank, $4.48 million; Dawn Robertson, the Managing Director of Myer, a well-known store in this country, $2.68 million; the Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Stock Exchange, Mr Tony D’Aloisio, $1.47 million. Let me take you back to the sports section for a second: Mr Bruno Cullen, the Managing Director of the very successful Brisbane Broncos club, receives a salary in excess of a quarter of a million dollars. Mr Russell Glasser, chief executive of CARE Australia, receives a $190,000 salary. Let me continue with some of these figures, because I think it is quite interesting. Let me take you to Jeffrey Lucy, the head of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission, who receives $370,000; the very fine and distinguished public servant Dr Peter Shergold, head of Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, $355,000; and Mr Michael Carmody, commissioner for the Australian Taxation Office, $353,000.

These are all Australians who do very fine things in their work and with their talents—sportspeople, businesspeople and public servants like Jeffrey Lucy, Peter Shergold and Michael Carmody. They all deserve the salaries they receive. They have an important role in the body politic of this country. In terms of the sportspeople and the likes of Megan Gale, the market sets their salaries.

Let me take you now to people who serve in this parliament, because it is quite interesting that there is a significant contrast. I think the community will be interested, for those who might be listening. Members of my electorate will be very interested to know, if they do not already know, what politicians receive. The Prime Minister, for running this country—with the enormous responsibility and burden of high office that he holds—does not receive anywhere near the millions of dollars that those in the business world receive. His salary is under $300,000—it is $288,990. The ministers in cabinet receive $191,000. The federal Deputy Leader of the Opposition receives $175,000—quite a salary. A backbench member of this parliament or a senator with no portfolio or parliamentary secretary responsibilities is on $111,000. That is a small insight into the figures that members of this parliament receive.

All these figures are on the public record. It is very important that it is transparent. As a sitting member of the parliament, as the federal member for Ryan, I want to strongly reiterate my position that it is very important that the community knows what members of parliament are receiving, what the Prime Minister’s salary is and what ministers and public servants receive. It is, after all, at the end of the day, taxpayers’ money.

What should be pointed out in the context of this bill is the salary contrast. TV entertainers like Rove McManus receive $5.5 million a year, yet the Prime Minister’s salary is less than $300,000 and he is the official representative of this country—he represents us as the head of government in this country and as a duly elected leader of the nation in our system of government. The comparison is a very interesting point for Australians to ponder. That we pay our top businesspeople like Chip Goodyear from BHP in excess of $5 million a year is a very interesting observation to make. We must remember that they also run major organisations. BHP Billiton has a $43 billion turnover and almost 40,000 employees. By contrast, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer have responsibility for the national economy. Our economy is valued at in excess of $800 billion. The federal budget that the Treasurer very finely manages and has carriage of is valued at in excess of $220 billion. The prosperity and growth of this nation of 20 million people hinge very much on how the Prime Minister, the Treasurer, the cabinet and the government run it.

It is an interesting point to make that the Minister for Defence in the cabinet has enormous responsibility with the protection of the country—Australian troop numbers in excess of 50,000 and a budget of almost $18 billion—yet his salary is nowhere near the salary of CEOs of the likes of Chip Goodyear or the salary of the delightful Megan Gale, whose talents are no doubt quite worthy of her millions of dollars.

In conclusion, it is vital for the successful administration of this country that this parliament continues to attract the best and brightest into its ranks. At the moment, one can come to this parliament through being a member of one’s own party or through being voted in here independently. I am sure that all members would agree with me that it is imperative that we place a great emphasis on attracting to this parliament the very best, the very brightest, those who have a passion for the future of our country, who have a passion for bringing prosperity into the homes of our fellow Australians.

My concern is that there is a danger, perhaps, that politics might become an option only for the very wealthy—those who have enough wealth to try and come into this place. Alternatively, people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds might see a salary in this place as a very high income indeed. I would hope that parliament can look into this and that we can have a discussion on this as well.

As a sitting member of parliament, I have the great honour and privilege to represent the people of Ryan. I continue to work very hard at bringing to this parliament and to the government issues of concern to them and, in return, representing back to the constituency important issues and policies that the government sees fit to discuss.

Debate interrupted.

See this speech in context