HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1)
2011-04-07 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

MEMBERS' ALLOWANCES

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (12:00): I move:

That this house calls for the provision of allowances to shadow ministers which will enable them to more adequately perform their roles and also for a review of the current system of allowances for members who sit on parliamentary committees.

I believe that people who perform the role of a shadow minister (and I am not one so there is no vested interest in calling for this) should receive an allowance because there is added work, added responsibility and added cost in what they do. To have a vigorous and effective democracy I think it is only reasonable that they be compensated or given an additional amount. I have not tried to set out what that amount should be. As members know, I have always advocated that the independent tribunal consider these things but the house has not chosen to go down that path. However, I believe that with some discussion between the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition it could be easily determined what that level of allowance should be. I put that forward. The other part of the motion—

The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr Pengilly): Order! If members want to talk I ask them to go outside. Thank you. I know the member for Schubert has a lot to say but he can do it outside.

The Hon. R.B. SUCH: I think the member for Schubert has been overcome with the adoration from the member for Ashford, so he is floating on a cloud! The other aspect of this motion is a review of the current system of allowances for members. Currently, we have the bizarre situation where some people get more than others, and those who are on select committees get two-thirds of nothing, or it is so close to that it does not matter.

Once again, I would urge the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition (and others who have an interest) to have a look at the question of allowances for members who sit on committees. It should not be just a mechanism for increasing what is in our pocket but it should be a fair and reasonable allocation for people who put in extra time and effort.

I do not believe in people working without being properly paid. I understand that is a basic union principle and so I am surprised that we have a situation where some members on some committees get paid more than others, and I think it is time that system was reviewed. I commend the motion to the house.

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON (Croydon) (12:03): I think most members of the public would be surprised to know that members of parliament get paid an additional allowance above their salary for serving on parliamentary committees.

The Hon. R.B. Such: It's extra work.

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: The member for Fisher says it is extra work. I think members of the public would say that it is part of our core function.

Ms Sanderson interjecting:

The ACTING SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: When I was first elected to parliament in 1989 I went back to my union office to clear out my desk and one of my colleagues, who had also been elected, was coming down the stairs of the union office. He said, 'Mate, could you see your way clear to supporting me for the Public Works Committee?' I said, 'No worries; I'll do that.' He was duly elected to the Public Works Committee and received the extra salary attendant on being on that. I was one of three members of the parliamentary Labor Party who did not get a committee.

The ACTING SPEAKER: I am delighted that the member for Croydon is now on the Public Works Committee.

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: And I am now on the Public Works Committee, having had some experience. I suppose one of the benefits of the member for Fisher's motion is that, once we start paying allowances to shadows, they will get comfortable and probably will not press as hard to become ministers, because the differential between their total salary and ministers' salaries will not be so great.

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis interjecting:

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: Yes. The member for West Torrens is leading me on to a point I was going to make anyway, that is, that the parliamentary Liberal Party would then scramble madly for these positions and fight one another in order to obtain them, leading to regular coups d'état and overthrowing of leaders.

I was a shadow for seven years, and it is an onerous job writing second reading replies to ministers' speeches when, of course, the minister's speech is written by his or her staff, but the shadow minister's, of course, has to be written by the shadow. I would be here in parliament until after midnight some non-sitting weeks preparing my replies to Trevor Griffin's voluminous legislation. I do not say anything about the quality of those responses other than to say that I can remember the member for Elder remarking once: 'Oh, Mick, peg-legging your way through another second reading reply.' I was always ready for when the government wanted its attorney-general bills to come on, unlike the current Leader of the Opposition who, when she was shadow for the attorney-general's portfolio, was repeatedly not ready to debate government bills. It seemed the dog always ate her homework. Perhaps paying her an allowance would have made a difference.

So far as I am aware, the opposition has not been calling for the provision of these allowances. There is nothing in the motion talking about hiring extra staff, specific remuneration, information technology equipment, stationery, chauffeured vehicles or an additional electoral allowance. I am not quite sure what the member for Fisher is proposing to the house.

Approval for such allowances would need to be considered more specifically by cabinet. Of course, I think these allowances would have to be set by the Remuneration Tribunal. For all those reasons, the government does not support the motion.

Mr BROCK (Frome) (12:09): I rise to support this motion. No matter who is in opposition, the shadow ministers must get out there, especially in the country. I take on board what the member for Croydon has indicated. Members of parliament get an electorate allowance. That is to serve their electorate itself, and they need it to get out there to understand what their electorates and the people out there are about.

Some country members cover a wide range of areas, and they need to get out there. The electorate allowance not only covers accommodation, it also covers meals, when you are talking to other people. So, that electoral allowance covers a wide range of issues, including donations, sponsorships and things like that. If you are a shadow minister, you need to be able to get out there and cover the whole of the state to be able to get out there to understand and to put pressure on the government of the day.

The motion by the member for Fisher is calling for the provision of allowances to assist those shadow ministers in doing so. He has not indicated whether they would get the same allowance as a member or a minister of the government of the day. He is suggesting that there could be discussion between the Premier and the Leader of the Opposition, or whoever it may be, to set up some form of the allowance. The allowance could be used to employ extra staff or resources to do investigative work because, bear in mind, they also need to do investigative work for their own electorate, and shadow ministers also need to undertake investigative work which covers the whole of the state.

I have no issues with supporting this, and I am sure that the communities of South Australia would have no problems with this. It is not as if you are asking for another $100,000, or whatever the figure may be: you are asking to have some sort of an allowance to cover it. I am very sure that people in this house do their jobs because they want to do their jobs; they are not in it for the money. However, if the shadow minister is going over to the West Coast and are staying overnight, it is costing them extra out of their electorate allowance for accommodation and meals. As I understand, they cannot claim that back.

I have no issues with supporting this. The member for Croydon has indicated that the shadow ministers will become complacent. I do not think they would at all. If you are on the opposition side it is a challenge to get into government, and vice versa. So, I have no hesitation in commending this to the house.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Pederick.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT