Gary Humphries (ACT, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I support the Higher Education Endowment Fund Bill 2007 and I seek leave to incorporate my speech on the second reading in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The speech read as follows—

Mr President, I wholeheartedly support this Government’s moves to establish a Higher Education Endowment Fund to secure the financial future of Australia’s world-class universities. I think it is further proof of this Government’s strong economic leadership that it has not only brought about a significant budget surplus for several years running now, but that it has had the foresight to invest part of this surplus in education—one of the most important investments that can be made for Australia’s future.

That said, I wish to make a contribution to this debate on the consequential amendments created by the Higher Education Endowment Fund Bill because there is an important change contained in these amendments, and a change which will potentially affect many thousands of people in my community of the Australian Capital Territory.

This Bill will expand the role of the Future Fund Board of Guardians to include the management of the Higher Education Endowment Fund. This is a sensible move, as it will ensure that this fund is responsibly and appropriately managed by people who have experience in managing big investments on behalf of the Australian community. But more importantly, Section 18A of this Bill will protect both the Future Fund and the Higher Education Endowment Fund from intervention or meddling by Government Ministers of any persuasion, and for that, many thousands of Commonwealth Superannuants in my electorate will be extremely thankful.

Specifically, section 18A prevents the Treasurer or the Finance Minister directing the Board of Guardians to invest in a particular financial asset, acquire a particular derivative or allocate financial assets to a particular business entity or a particular business. The effect of this will be that no Government, of whatever political inclination, will be able to direct how or where the money from these funds is spent. The Future Fund, and with it the Higher Education Endowment Fund, will become a locked box. It is impossible to overstate the importance of this section 18A, particularly when we have an alternative Government who have clearly stated their intention to treat the Future Fund less like a locked box, and more like a piggy bank to be cracked open whenever they hear the ice-cream truck of wild ideas coming down the street.

The Future Fund was set up to meet the unfunded superannuation liabilities of thousands of past and present Commonwealth Public Servants. It was set up so that those who have spent their careers working diligently on behalf of the Commonwealth will receive every cent they are entitled to in retirement. It was set up to allow future governments to meet their legal and social responsibilities to today’s workers, without bankrupting future generations in the process. It was not set up so that future governments could dip into it at will to fund the promises which they are banking on to secure election later this year.

And yet that is exactly what the Labor Party is proposing to do. Despite criticising this Government in the past for not making the Future Fund enough of a ‘locked box’, Labor is now proposing to dip into the fund and swipe $2 billion to pay for their half-baked broadband scheme. They want to take $2 billion out of the pockets of retirees and older Australians to pay for a broadband plan that won’t reach all Australians, won’t deliver services to the bush, and won’t address inherent infrastructure problems with existing telecommunications technology. Our Government has a plan to use a mix of wireless, ADSL and satellite technology—and a mix of public and private investment—to provide high speed coverage to 99% of the Australian population at very little cost, and will have this service up and running within two years. By contrast, Labor wants to drain the $2 billion Communications Fund and take $2 billion from the Future Fund to pay for a plan which will leave many Australians to wallow in coverage black holes, and which won’t even be up and running within this decade.

This is Labor’s so-called ‘Broadband Future’, and Commonwealth superannuants are expected to pay for it with their hard-earned entitlements. Perhaps it wouldn’t be so bad if it were only $2 billion they proposed to spend, but Labor’s Lindsay Tanner has also repeatedly refused to rule out further raids on the fund. He has refused to say what else Labor might use the Future Fund and its interest for, or how much might be left over for its intended purpose of paying superannuation entitlements when they’ve finished frittering it away on pointless broadband plans, consultative committees and advisory groups. This willingness on the part of Labor to pick superannuant pockets to pay for their promises begs a rather serious question: does Labor care about Commonwealth public servants at all?

Perhaps they don’t, Mr President, and perhaps they take these public servants and their roles for granted, and therein lies the problem. From the top of the party down to the local apparatchiks we see nothing but disdain for the public service, and hear nothing but loud rhetoric about big spending cuts which will put jobs at risk and severely curtail the important work our public servants do. Although my colleagues and I on this side of the house seriously doubt Labor’s ability to make these cuts given the dodgy maths their claims are based on, the fact is that they have long had the public service in their sights.

As if it isn’t bad enough that this is the case, as if it isn’t worrying enough that Labor is talking about cutting billions of dollars from the budgets of dozens of Departments, now they also want to rob those public servants who manage to hang on to their jobs long enough to accrue superannuation of this entitlement! Let’s be completely upfront about this: robbing the Future Fund is robbing from Commonwealth superannuants. Labor’s plan to raid the Future Fund amounts to a raid on the secure futures of many thousands of Commonwealth public servants.

There are some senior Labor figures that do not seem to have a problem with this. For example, in August this year in a debate on communications infrastructure, former Labor Leader Simon Crean told the Parliament: “The government’s solution is to put [savings] into the Future Fund, which does what? It meets the unfunded superannuation liabilities of who? Commonwealth public servants. Why should the nation’s savings be used for such a limited purpose? Why should the Future Fund be used to pay only the superannuation liabilities of Commonwealth public servants? Apparently, to Mr Crean, providing for the retirement of many thousands of Commonwealth workers is a “limited purpose”. Apparently, Labor doesn’t think this is a worthwhile way to spend a portion of the nation’s savings.

Well, I do. As Senator for the ACT, the territory where so many public servants are based, I know very well the contribution these workers make, and how hard they work on behalf of the Government of the day – whoever that Government may be. I know that many public servants spend their entire working lives within the service, accumulating a wealth of valuable experience and knowledge which Governments often rely on to guide their decision-making. And I believe that these workers, like all other Australians, have the right to know that when the time comes, their employer will be able to pay their superannuation entitlements, not turn around and say ‘Sorry, but we spent it all on broadband and some other stuff that seemed like a good idea at the time.’

This is why this Bill is so important, and why I am pleased to lend my support to it, particularly section 18A. It may seem as though this Bill just ties up the legislative loose ends surrounding the creation of the Higher Education Endowment Fund, but in reality, there is a much more important question at stake. That is: do we lock the Future Fund away from interference by governments so that it is able to meet the Commonwealth’s superannuation liabilities into the future, or do we leave it open to raids by any Government which needs a quick cash injection?

I know that I speak for the many thousands of Commonwealth public servants in my electorate when I say that the Future Fund should be treated as a locked box, not a piggy bank, and as an investment for the future, not a source of ready funds today. Commonwealth superannuants have just as much right to a financially secure future as all other Australian workers, and for that reason I would urge my colleagues on both sides of this chamber to support this Bill and save the Future Fund from the grubby hands of a future Labor Government or any others who would try to raid it.