Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

At the outset I would like to congratulate the honourable member for Wakefield on his very thought-provoking contribution on the Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Bill 2005. I found it particularly interesting, and I believe it was a valuable addition to the debate in this place.

When I was interrupted last night by the adjournment debate, I had virtually finished my contribution on the Ministers of State Amendment Bill 2005. The bill itself is not a controversial bill. A bill of similar form enters the parliament each year. Usually, both sides of politics support this bill because it is a sensible bill which provides a mechanism that allows for the allocation of the additional remuneration that is required to meet additional ministerial salaries.

The opposition has sought, through the amendment, to politicise this debate, and that is a matter somewhat lacking in virtue, in my view. I think this bill, being a machinery bill, is worthy of a speedy passage. When I look at what we do not pay our Prime Minister, our Treasurer, our senior ministers and other ministers, I think that at some stage some government in Australia will have to grasp the nettle and redress the situation where heads of departments are, in some cases, paid two, three or four times the amount of salary paid to the minister in charge of that department. I am not suggesting that those senior public servants are well paid by corporate standards, but someone at some stage will have to look at ministerial remuneration.

I know the Prime Minister, the Treasurer, the Deputy Prime Minister and other senior ministers would work for virtually nothing if that were permitted, but equity determines and demands, in my view, that people who do have that high level of responsibility should receive a remuneration commensurate with that responsibility. When one looks at what some of the chief executive officers of Australian companies receive today and what the Prime Minister does not receive, one clearly sees there is some obvious lack of balance.

This bill will ensure that the Ministers of State Act 1952 continues to have the capacity it needs to meet the remuneration requirements of the government to ensure that ministers in fact receive the salaries and other remuneration that ministers under the law are currently entitled to. On that basis, I am very happy to commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context