Mr PALLAS (Tarneit)  —  I  rise  to  speak  on the Parliamentary Salaries and Superannuation Amendment (Salary  Restraint)  Bill 2012. My contribution to this bill will be brief. The  state opposition  does not oppose the bill. However, in indicating that position let me be clear that it does not come out of a sense of acceptance  that this bill reflects,  as is stated in the second-reading speech, the government’s commitment to responsible fiscal management.

Rather, this  bill is about  politicians awarding pay  increases to politicians, and in  those circumstances, recognising that  harsh reality, in the  absence of any alternative measure or mechanism or for  that matter justification,  members of  Parliament should not  afford to themselves wage  increases higher than  the wage outcomes being imposed on the Victorian public sector.

Those outcomes are the result of a  mandated and,  might I say, inflexible state government wages  policy. We could argue about whether 2.5 per cent reflects the expectation of the  community — I do not believe for one moment that it does — or indeed the  outcome of wage bargains struck  to date, but quite frankly we on this side of the house would  prefer  to  spend  this Parliament’s time debating matters of more pressing concern to the Victorian public.

The opposition supports the proposition stated in the second-reading speech:

  The  Victorian government does not  believe that the increase given to federal  parliamentarians should flow on to Victorian  parliamentary  salaries  in  the  current economic circumstances.

  The government believes that  the  proper  course  would be for members of the  Victorian  Parliament to receive an  increase in line  with  the public sector  wages  policy,   and  for  a  new  mechanism  to  be  established  for  future  adjustments.

Let  us  hope this is  the  last time this Parliament  has  to indulge itself in talking about the  isolated level of  wage increases politicians intend awarding to  themselves.  Using legislation to set wages on  a  regular  basis  not  only consumes  the time  of  this  Parliament  but  is  also  ultimately  an  act  of self-absorption and  introspection,  when  the community expects members of this place to direct their energies and efforts beyond our own fundamental concerns.

I acknowledge that this is not the first time and neither is this government the first  government  to  propose to  deal  with politicians’ pay  in  this manner. Nevertheless it is an unsustainable mechanism that  should not reside within our control.  No other  section  of the community  indulges  itself with  mechanisms managed by  itself to remunerate itself.  The opposition supports the concept of an independent review to provide the government with options for transparent and accountable governance arrangements.

The  wages of  members of this place are in an uncertain situation following the findings of the  initial report of the Remuneration Tribunal concerning  members of Parliament dated December  2011, which stated that any federal linkage should be  severed.  Consequently, and  in  the absence of  any alternative independent mechanism or arrangement, salary adjustments of 2.5 per cent would seem the only reasonable and appropriate course available to this place.

On  that basis the opposition does not oppose this bill  and hopes never to have to  see  the  Parliament’s time  devoted  to  one-off,  ad  hoc  wage adjustment legislation in the future.

See Tim’s speech in Hansard here.