Mr LUGG - 1999-02-18
The Leader of the Opposition said on radio yesterday that she was not interested in matching her words with action by resigning from the parliamentary super scheme. Given Labor’s hypocrisy on this issue, does the Chief Minister have any advice for Labor that may help them salvage some credibility?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, in a gentlemanly way I treat this issue quite seriously, because it follows upon concern and outrage, one could say, from the opposition about the situation that exists in the Parliamentary Superannuation Scheme. The view that was clearly expressed by the Leader of the Opposition, as I understood it at the time, in Caucus with her colleagues, was that they wished to leave that particular scheme.
I gave an undertaking yesterday that, on preliminary investigations I had done, it would take only a minor legislative amendment to ensure we could arrange for them to achieve that particular objective. I also laid a challenge to the Leader of the Opposition that she caucus with her colleagues at lunchtime and confirm their position, and that I would concurrently set in place the mechanisms needed to enable them to leave the scheme.
I have had no correspondence or conversation with the Leader of the Opposition on this, but I have a transcript from the 8DDD Drive Time program yesterday. She said then, in essence that Labor had talked about it, and they believed: ‘Entitlements for parliamentarians were getting more generous and it was just becoming unacceptable’. She then went on to say that it was public policy, that they would do it in an appropriate way, and that the time was not yet right.
Mr Stirling: She didn’t say that. If you are going to use a transcript, use a transcript.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: I will quote from the transcript and you might recall the words I just used. I used them from the transcript: ‘This is public policy and we will do it in the appropriate way’. Did anyone notice any difference?
Mr Stirling interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr Bailey: She said she would do it over 2 years!
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: She also made – and this is a very important point - weight of the fact that: ‘There won’t be anything in terms of retrospectivity. I am not talking about hacking off people’s entitlements who currently have them. I am not intending to have a situation where you could ring up Marshall Perron and say: “Hey, Marshall, we’ve changed the scheme; I want it back”’. That’s the excuse.
A member interjecting.
Mr BURKE: The issue of retrospectivity starts today. I give an undertaking that there will be absolutely no retrospectivity from today. Marshall Perron and others are not affected. I have had the forms prepared and I ask the attendant to pass the forms to the Leader of the Opposition and her colleagues. These forms will clear the parliamentary draftsman to prepare the necessary legislation. The form reads:
I, [the individual member of the opposition] hereby resign from the Legislative Assembly Members’ Superannuation Scheme effective from the date hereunder. I understand that in accordance with the amendments to the Legislative Assembly Members’ Superannuation Act the benefits payable to me will be held in trust from the date hereunder until entry in an alternative superannuation scheme.
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: Members would note the quality of the paper. It accords with the seriousness of the issue that they are about to undertake.
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Chief Minister has the floor.
Mr BURKE: There is a clear issue here and that is are you or are you not a fraud? Put your money where your mouth is. If you want to be a responsible parliamentarian, there is the mechanism. If you want to claim to Territorians that this is an unfair scheme and you want no part of it, there is the mechanism. I guarantee absolutely no retrospectivity. Marshall Perron and others will not be affected.
I also ask this question for when you claim your defence to the media. When you introduce your new scheme, if you ever attain government, will it include existing members or only new members? If it is only for new members to the scheme, all these pious people on the other side would continue to enjoy all the benefits that they currently complain of. However, I imagine the Leader of the Opposition will maintain some defence. She may gain some acceptance from some sections of the media that she needs time or whatever.
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is too much interjection from both sides of the House. The Chief Minister has the floor.
Mr BURKE: Mr Speaker, I have a second test on credibility. The second test is: don’t agree to the extra 5% that will be passed in legislation.
Ms Martin: We’re not.
Mr BURKE: Good. A form has been prepared. All you have to do is sign it. It is dated from today and you agree to exit from that 5% increase.
Ms Martin: We’ll sign that one.
Mr BURKE: That’s good because …
Ms Martin: But we are preparing policy, Denis, we’re not going to jump to your agenda. If you want to play games over this …
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will have an opportunity at some stage to speak on this matter. There is a range of opportunities to speak on any issue. The honourable the Chief Minister.
Mr BURKE: This particular scheme has enjoyed the bipartisan support of this House for many years. This side of the House trusts the advice of actuaries who control the scheme, and have trusted in the past the advice that has been given by either the Chief Minister or the Leader of the Opposition at the time of making our decisions. But if you want nought of that, there’s the form, leave the scheme. Certainly the scheme will benefit from less members and you can go about your own business and explain to Territory taxpayers whether you have any credibility on this issue or not.
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, in a gentlemanly way I treat this issue quite seriously, because it follows upon concern and outrage, one could say, from the opposition about the situation that exists in the Parliamentary Superannuation Scheme. The view that was clearly expressed by the Leader of the Opposition, as I understood it at the time, in Caucus with her colleagues, was that they wished to leave that particular scheme.
I gave an undertaking yesterday that, on preliminary investigations I had done, it would take only a minor legislative amendment to ensure we could arrange for them to achieve that particular objective. I also laid a challenge to the Leader of the Opposition that she caucus with her colleagues at lunchtime and confirm their position, and that I would concurrently set in place the mechanisms needed to enable them to leave the scheme.
I have had no correspondence or conversation with the Leader of the Opposition on this, but I have a transcript from the 8DDD Drive Time program yesterday. She said then, in essence that Labor had talked about it, and they believed: ‘Entitlements for parliamentarians were getting more generous and it was just becoming unacceptable’. She then went on to say that it was public policy, that they would do it in an appropriate way, and that the time was not yet right.
Mr Stirling: She didn’t say that. If you are going to use a transcript, use a transcript.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: I will quote from the transcript and you might recall the words I just used. I used them from the transcript: ‘This is public policy and we will do it in the appropriate way’. Did anyone notice any difference?
Mr Stirling interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr Bailey: She said she would do it over 2 years!
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: She also made – and this is a very important point - weight of the fact that: ‘There won’t be anything in terms of retrospectivity. I am not talking about hacking off people’s entitlements who currently have them. I am not intending to have a situation where you could ring up Marshall Perron and say: “Hey, Marshall, we’ve changed the scheme; I want it back”’. That’s the excuse.
A member interjecting.
Mr BURKE: The issue of retrospectivity starts today. I give an undertaking that there will be absolutely no retrospectivity from today. Marshall Perron and others are not affected. I have had the forms prepared and I ask the attendant to pass the forms to the Leader of the Opposition and her colleagues. These forms will clear the parliamentary draftsman to prepare the necessary legislation. The form reads:
I, [the individual member of the opposition] hereby resign from the Legislative Assembly Members’ Superannuation Scheme effective from the date hereunder. I understand that in accordance with the amendments to the Legislative Assembly Members’ Superannuation Act the benefits payable to me will be held in trust from the date hereunder until entry in an alternative superannuation scheme.
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: Members would note the quality of the paper. It accords with the seriousness of the issue that they are about to undertake.
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Chief Minister has the floor.
Mr BURKE: There is a clear issue here and that is are you or are you not a fraud? Put your money where your mouth is. If you want to be a responsible parliamentarian, there is the mechanism. If you want to claim to Territorians that this is an unfair scheme and you want no part of it, there is the mechanism. I guarantee absolutely no retrospectivity. Marshall Perron and others will not be affected.
I also ask this question for when you claim your defence to the media. When you introduce your new scheme, if you ever attain government, will it include existing members or only new members? If it is only for new members to the scheme, all these pious people on the other side would continue to enjoy all the benefits that they currently complain of. However, I imagine the Leader of the Opposition will maintain some defence. She may gain some acceptance from some sections of the media that she needs time or whatever.
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is too much interjection from both sides of the House. The Chief Minister has the floor.
Mr BURKE: Mr Speaker, I have a second test on credibility. The second test is: don’t agree to the extra 5% that will be passed in legislation.
Ms Martin: We’re not.
Mr BURKE: Good. A form has been prepared. All you have to do is sign it. It is dated from today and you agree to exit from that 5% increase.
Ms Martin: We’ll sign that one.
Mr BURKE: That’s good because …
Ms Martin: But we are preparing policy, Denis, we’re not going to jump to your agenda. If you want to play games over this …
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will have an opportunity at some stage to speak on this matter. There is a range of opportunities to speak on any issue. The honourable the Chief Minister.
Mr BURKE: This particular scheme has enjoyed the bipartisan support of this House for many years. This side of the House trusts the advice of actuaries who control the scheme, and have trusted in the past the advice that has been given by either the Chief Minister or the Leader of the Opposition at the time of making our decisions. But if you want nought of that, there’s the form, leave the scheme. Certainly the scheme will benefit from less members and you can go about your own business and explain to Territory taxpayers whether you have any credibility on this issue or not.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016