Steve Fielding (Victoria, Family First Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Chris Evans. Given that Australians are appalled at the outrageous salary packages which are being paid to senior executives, given that the Prime Minister agrees and says, ‘Game over; we’ve got to rein it in; people just have had a gutful of greed in terms of these obscene salary structures,’ and given that excessive parliamentary super is still in place for many members in this chamber and in the other place and they will greedily line their pockets on retirement with exorbitant super payouts, doesn’t it smack of hypocrisy for the Prime Minister to point the finger at fat cat executives when he and many of his MPs are on the same gravy train?

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Fielding for his question, although I think, quite frankly, it is a bit over the top. It is not a question of trying to square everybody up. I think executive pay levels and excessive remuneration are genuine issues which I think the community is concerned about. I am concerned about that, the Prime Minister is concerned about that and I think generally people are concerned about that. They have been excessive and the Prime Minister has made it clear that he has serious concerns and has tried to initiate some action to address this. Part of that is to be clear with some of these company executives and their boards that the public thinks they have gone way too far and that remuneration ought to be much more closely related to their performance and much more in line with community standards. That is the point the Prime Minister has made and hopefully that will provide some incentive to boards of large companies and their executives as to the payments they are looking to pay themselves.

We ought to apply all the moral suasion and any other measures we can to try to rein in that excessive remuneration. The government, through APRA, is taking some measures in this regard by developing a framework of principles for executive remuneration structures to apply to APRA regulated institutions, like banks and insurance companies. I think that work will be helpful. Clearly we are not going to be able to regulate successfully in all cases. I think the moral suasion that comes from the Prime Minister’s comments and the views of all parliamentarians should be heeded by those executives about having much more reasonable remuneration than some that has been paid— (Time expired)

Steve Fielding (Victoria, Family First Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Given that over 120 MPs will still get a golden handshake in an excessive superannuation payout when they leave parliament, is the government willing to put an end to this abuse of taxpayers’ dollars and rein in the obscene parliamentary superannuation scheme to demonstrate that it is serious about stopping over-the-top executive salaries and that it is willing to lead by example on this issue? Yes or no: is it game over for these excessive parliamentary superannuation payouts?

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is always hard to defend parliamentary entitlements and, quite frankly, when you go for the cheap line, you will probably get a good run out of that, but I do not think you are very serious. As you know, the previous government moved to close the old superannuation scheme—there was bipartisan support for that—and introduced a new superannuation arrangement which applies to new members. As in all other cases in Australia, when the scheme is ended, people on the old arrangements are allowed to remain on those arrangements. That is a principle that was applied throughout Australia on the closure of schemes. Senator Sherry is much more expert in this than me. Those same rules were applied when the decision was taken in relation to the old parliamentary superannuation scheme. All new members go on to the new arrangements. The senator would be aware of that and, as I said, I think the comments were a bit over the top.

Steve Fielding (Victoria, Family First Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. I will have a third go at it. Given the federal Treasurer, Wayne Swan, described as ‘sickening’ the payouts given to the privileged few when others are struggling and given the Rudd government talks about ending this rorting but fails to act, will it act if the Leader of the Opposition calls for an end to excessive parliamentary super for all of those members elected before 2004, just as Mr Howard jumped after Mr Latham called for an end to the rort for then-new MPs?

Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, it is not often that I get close to the point of saying that a question does not deserve a serious answer, but Senator Fielding is getting very close. It is quite right to say that the issue of excessive remuneration ought to be on the public agenda. This government has made it very clear that it thinks a lot of that remuneration has been excessive. We are also very proud of achievements in introducing compulsory superannuation to provide much better retirement income for all Australian workers and families under the previous Hawke and Keating governments. That is a vast improvement in public policy in this country. Senator Fielding can argue his point about parliamentary remuneration arrangements before the tribunal, can seek to use his position as a legislator to make changes, but, quite frankly, cheap shots do not deserve much more of a response than that.