Cory Bernardi (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I will not even take the five minutes, but I understand that there may be another comment coming from someone else. This is a very serious issue because it plays out in the public mind the benefits attached to being a politician and the pecuniary benefits, particularly in regard to superannuation. For the record, and for the people in the gallery who are here today, politicians’ superannuation was changed in 2004 at the insistence of then Labor leader Mark Latham, who decried superannuation entitlements for politicians. I note he continues to take pot shots at the Labor Party whilst luxuriating on the benefits that he so railed against.

The Prime Minister at the time, Mr Howard, changed politicians’ superannuation entitlements to bring them into line with the Public Service. Accordingly, the Parliamentary Superannuation Amendment (Removal of Excessive Super) Bill 2009, presented by Senator Fielding, is seeking to wind back the clock, if you like, and to change the rules midstream for those who had served in this parliament for years before 2004. This is a matter of fairness and equity. Whether you agree with what politicians receive in remuneration or not, whether you think it is excessive or not enough, is not the point.

When people enter into service in public life, they do so under a number of conditions and expectations. It is wrong to change those expectations retrospectively. I believe that this is a matter of equity not only in regard to this particular issue but also in regard to matters of taxation and matters of other benefits. It just beggars belief that people will continue to invest in our country and put themselves forward for public service or any other endeavour, quite frankly, under a set of terms and conditions if then a government of any persuasion can simply wind back the clock and say, ‘I am sorry; we’re going to change those terms and conditions, and you’re going to have to make up the other issues.’ I see Senator Fielding has come in. I am glad I have been able to provide you with an opportunity to comment on your own bill, Senator Fielding, and I am sure you will want to do so.

As I said, this comes back to an issue of principle. I am opposed in principle to retrospective legislation that disadvantages people who have done nothing to deserve disadvantage in their own sense. I am pleased too that we have reached agreement on this with the major parties. The Labor Party and the coalition have agreed to this report and that this bill should not be passed because it does deny what I would term ‘natural justice’. It is possibly not the correct legal term, but it is, I think, an appropriate term about how we are going to deal with people who enter into particular circumstances and agreements under the stated conditions. We should not roll them back. I will leave my comments there because I understand there is another speaker who would like to talk on this.