Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I note the interjection from Senator Macdonald, who thinks it is okay to continue to protect the privileged life we as politicians lead. I understand he thinks that unlimited international travel is something that politicians should be entitled to. Well, we don't, Senator Macdonald. We actually think that it is about time that politicians started to act in a way that is consistent not just with what the community expects of us but is actually consistent with what is fair and decent.

This bill is an important step forward and we welcome it. We think the government has made some significant steps in the right direction. It will remove significant perks for former members of parliament but there is still a long way to go. We still have the pre-2004 pension system. So if you were elected prior to 2004 you get this incredibly generous pension system, which is a significant liability on the government budget. At a time when this government is trying to take money out of the pockets of single parents, of young people and of pensioners, they think it is okay that members of parliament, former ministers for example, can receive more than $200,000 a year in a parliamentary pension and then on top of that get paid for their 'jobs for the boys' gigs, whether it be as human rights representatives with DFAT or indeed in their ambassadorial roles. Really! If we are going to do this properly, isn't it about time we end the rort that is the pre-2004 pension system.

We have a situation in this country where ordinary people are getting squeezed, where we are seeing very little wage growth, and yet pollies' salaries are already in the top 1.6 per cent of taxpayers. On top of that we get a $32,000 electorate allowance. Only a few moments ago in this chamber we had the Labor party and Liberal Party joining together to say, 'No, we do not want any restrictions on politicians pocketing that money.' A reasonable amendment to this legislation, or indeed a reasonable motion, would be that that money, which is called an electorate allowance, actually be spent on the electorate, on politicians doing their parliamentary duties, rather than that money being pocketed as salary.