House debates

Thursday, 9 August 2007

Federal Magistrates Amendment (Disability and Death Benefits) Bill 2006

Second Reading

10:52 am

Photo of Philip RuddockPhilip Ruddock (Berowra, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Hansard source

Firstly, I apologise. I had some House duty in another place, and I appreciate that colleagues have extended some courtesy to me. I thank them for that. I note that those who have addressed this bill include the members for Gellibrand, Lowe, Denison, Fisher and Boothby. I thank them for the contributions they have made. Before I deal with a couple of observations on matters that I understand have been the subject of comment, I reiterate that this bill will provide federal magistrates and their dependants with improved financial protection in the event of serious disability or death. The government acknowledges the significant contribution magistrates have made to an efficient federal civil justice system. It is the government’s view that the public interest is served by ensuring that federal magistrates with disabilities which prevent them performing their duties retire with adequate financial provision.

Currently, a federal magistrate whose performance is significantly impaired for medical reasons might nonetheless be unwilling to resign. This is particularly important where magistrates have tenure to age 70 and can only be removed on grounds of proven misbehaviour or incapacity. If the performance of a federal magistrate were significantly impaired for medical reasons, it is desirable that the lack of adequate disability provision not be a barrier to the magistrate’s willingness to resign.

I understand that during the course of the debate there was some concern about this measure in the context of superannuation benefits, and people foreshadowed that there may be amendments in another place. I understand they may seek to do that. I say only that moving amendments to judicial pensions and those in relation to magistrates in isolation from the wider class of people to whom that issue may be relevant would not be, in my view, appropriate. While the government has said that it wants to deal with those—

Comments

No comments