Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to Senator Minchin, representing the Treasurer. What justifies members of parliament getting a 6.7 per cent pay increase while pensioners get nothing?

Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance and Administration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As you know, the Remuneration Tribunal determines the remuneration for members of parliament. It does that independently. Members of parliament are able to make submissions to the Remuneration Tribunal about the appropriate remuneration for members of parliament. This is obviously an extremely controversial matter in the Australian community. I think the community has great expectations of its members of parliament. I think all members of parliament, including Senator Brown and others, work extremely hard on behalf of their constituents and determining the appropriate remuneration is not an easy task. Many MPs feel that they are underpaid; whereas the community often feels that they are overpaid. I guess it is the case that, compared to average weekly earnings, MPs are reasonably well remunerated, but the remuneration, as I said, is a matter for the Remuneration Tribunal.

As to the position of age pensioners, I think one of our government’s most significant decisions on coming to office was changing the basis of indexation for age pensioners from CPI to MTAWE—male total average weekly earnings. That is actually one of the most expensive decisions that we have made, but we are pleased that we made it. It means that age pensioners receive greater increases in their pensions than would otherwise be the case because it is the extremely good outcome of our government that average weekly earnings are exceeding the CPI; therefore, pensions are increasing faster than they would have had we not changed the basis of indexation of the age pension.

We are proud of our record in assisting age pensioners by improving their indexation basis. It is always easy and—with great respect to Senator Brown—rather cheap politics to compare the position of age pensioners to members of parliament. The age pension is a function of the Western world, deeming that we should provide a retirement income to those who have not been able to provide adequately for themselves in their retirement. It is a welfare measure for those who are needy in our community and are not able to provide for themselves. However, for the salaries for members of parliament, it is difficult to determine what sort of remuneration is required to attract the best and brightest to our parliaments to ensure that our parliaments are capable of delivering good parliamentarians, good ministers and good shadow ministers without getting too far out of line with community expectations.

I understand Senator Brown wanting to pursue the politics of this, but I think reasonable Australians will accept that we should appropriately remunerate members of parliament who work hard on their behalf while ensuring that age pensioners are properly looked after, as we have done by indexing their pensions to average male weekly earnings.

Bob Brown (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Does the minister think it is reasonable that the increase for the Prime Minister alone in this proposed pay rise will be the equivalent of the whole pension for Australia’s pensioners? Does the minister really believe that, with increasing rental costs, transport costs and food costs, $219.50 a week is a fair living income for Australia’s 1.2 million full pensioners?

Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance and Administration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think that to draw a comparison between the Prime Minister of the country and age pensioners is really not very fair in the sense that the Prime Minister, whatever his age may be and whichever party he represents, works extremely hard on behalf of all Australians. I think what Australians find most extraordinary is that the Prime Minister is paid about as much as a salaried solicitor in a major Sydney law firm. When the Prime Minister’s salary is compared to the CEOs of major Australian companies, you will see that—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Paul Calvert (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senators on my left, you have had your moment of fun. Come to order!

Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance and Administration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

the Prime Minister’s salary can be as little as one-tenth of the salary of someone running a major bank in this country. I think most Australians would find that rather extraordinary given the work that any prime minister of whatever political persuasion does on behalf of this country. In relation to age pensioners, we are obviously ensuring that we adequately provide—(Time expired)