News Home Just In Australia World Business Sport Entertainment Weather | Opinion Blogs

Hot tags: australia, sport, nsw, qld, law-crime-and-justice, business-economics-and-finance, united-states, government-and-politics, crime, world-politics

Ministers deserve $100k pay rise: report

Posted December 4, 2008 09:38:00
Updated December 4, 2008 12:58:00

A report from the tribunal which sets the pay of federal politicians says MPs and ministers should receive a hefty pay rise.

The Remuneration Tribunal's annual report shows cabinet ministers are being paid less than top public servants.

It is recommending they receive a pay rise of more than $100,000 a year.

Retired Liberal MP Bruce Baird has told AM that politicians' salaries should be boosted to ensure the best talent is attracted to parliament.

"If we want people who are competent and understand the various strategies that the Government should follow, then I think we need to have people who are well-trained with appropriate background experience - both in the academic and professional business community - and pay them accordingly," he said.

According to the tribunal website, a federal parliamentarian's base salary is currently $127,060 per year.

A cabinet minister receives an additional 72.5 per cent ($92,118) on top of the base salary, bringing the yearly salary to $219,178.

Mr Baird says job-related stress is also putting quality people off from joining the parliamentary ranks.

"Well, certainly there's some very good quality people there, as we can see in the Federal Government, the Federal Opposition. But nevertheless there are, if you look at preselections within the Liberal Party, there are far less people that stand for preselections than we used to have.

"It's a combination of poor salaries, and quite often I talk to young people [who] say, 'look, I just can't afford it mate, the salaries are too low, I've got to look after my family, pay off the mortgage. I just can't do it when I see how much I'm paid in my career'."

"Then you have people who are ideological, who think, regardless, they want to put back into the community. But it's a tough call.

"And when you add to it the particular stresses and strains on individuals if something goes wrong - they're held up to ridicule for everyone to see. It's a situation that doesn't apply out in the private sector and careers can end spectacularly and the opportunities for further jobs are just totally diminished."

Mr Baird believes heads of governments have been unwilling to address the issue of politicians' pay because of the political flack when increases are paid out.

"Last time the Prime Minister said we can't pay anybody, we've got to lead the community, show restraint and no increases for any parliamentarian," he said.

"And in fact what happened is the business community continued to increase their salaries and the parliamentarians fell further behind.

"In Singapore they recognise the level of responsibility and pay them according to what is appropriate within the business community."

Tags: government-and-politics, federal-government, parliament, australia, act, canberra-2600

Search for news

Comments (101)

Comments for this story are closed. No new comments can be added. If you would like to have your say on this issue, you can do so via the Emails section of our Opinion pages.

RCL:

04 Dec 2008 9:54:06am

If you want to ensure the best talent is attracted to the job then salaries for ministers should be based on performance standards: it might also ensure that the job they are being paid for is also done adequately. That's how it works for many people in the private sector and seems to work rather well in my honest opinion.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
praedus:

04 Dec 2008 9:56:44am

I'll support that as soon as TAFE teachers in Victoria get the increase they deserve and their salary goes up to 150 000.- p.a.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
DeepFritz:

04 Dec 2008 9:57:17am

News flash - Most working people deserve $100k pay rise. Most won't get it for some unknown reason...

Agree (0) Alert moderator
C Wallace:

04 Dec 2008 9:57:45am

High salaries don't necessarily attract the competent. They attract those who want a lot of money.

Agree (3) Alert moderator
Marty:

04 Dec 2008 9:58:07am

And they would also move to limit executive salaries???
A bit hypocritical one might say.
Most of them aren't worth the money they are getting now.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
m1scha:

04 Dec 2008 9:59:11am

Perhaps the community might see more sense in reducing the pay of the top public servants. Except high flying CEOs aka the cause of our current economic woes will still continue to be paid exorbitant rates for doing not much more.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Green:

04 Dec 2008 9:59:18am

Pay peanuts, get monkeys.

Pay more peanuts, get bigger monkeys.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Hobbit:

04 Dec 2008 10:00:09am

I don't see why the ministers' pay packet should be compared with the Sol Trujillo's of this country - compared with my meager one, they get enough, without counting all the perks they get for life. If I remember well, Howard got through two pay increases not that long ago. As the inflation goes down, I don't see how a further increase is justified; but what am I talking about - politicians will pounce on that report to fatten up their bank accounts.

Agree (1) Alert moderator
Bullfrog:

04 Dec 2008 10:00:47am

I'm not sure what the package for a minister is worth, but if it is anything less than $1,000,000 per annum (which is at the bottom end of the scale for managing such a large organisation in the private world), then I'd support the rise.

Despite the nominal quality of the current crop (on both sides), if we want to attract high quality personnel, we need an appropriate level of remuneration.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Peter of Melbourne:

04 Dec 2008 10:01:15am

Sounds like we are paying managers in the so called public service too much! if politicians get a pay rise, what perks will be taken from them, how about the pension plan only you and i can dream about for a start! oh hang on, when i retire the country will not be paying a pension since we are being forced to gamble with our Super in the stock market

Agree (1) Alert moderator
Suncoast:

04 Dec 2008 10:03:38am

Not only do some public servants get more but so do a lot of middle managers.
It is time for a rethink on this ... although I am not convinced that it is the $s that attracts people to politics and I would want some greater evidence that more $s would bring better talent.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
lionel hurst:

04 Dec 2008 10:04:04am

Easy solution - reduce the salaries of all highly paid public servants and you don't need to increase the politicians' pay. We are in a worldwide recession aren't we?

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Jo S:

04 Dec 2008 10:05:05am

Looking at this another way, perhaps the public servants are overpaid.

Agree (1) Alert moderator
Peter R:

04 Dec 2008 10:05:25am

Ok, so they want a pay rise, fair enough. But look into their packages further and you will see that they get a darn good deal.

Commoners like myself have to pay for everything, transport getting to and from work, mortgages etc.

I know one Senator personally, and they each receive money for each night in Canberra (over $300 per night).

Now the majority of them spend around 76 nights per year, at lets say $300 per night, this works out to be $22,800 per annum.

So what do they do? They purchase properties in Canberra and rent rooms out and stay at these properties and pocket the cash.

Politicians also have a very very generous superannuation package.

In times when working families are finding it tough, politicians have to stick by them, raising wages will not attract the best, and if it did, then that is not why we would want them.

It takes a special breed of humans to want to become a politician and as Billy Connolly said...

"The drive to want to become a politician should ban you for life from ever being one"

Touche

Agree (1) Alert moderator
Jeff:

04 Dec 2008 10:05:38am

And higher salaries in the finance and banking sectors has sure attracted the 'best' talent.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Patch:

04 Dec 2008 10:06:14am

Maybe having a low pay rate will attract only those who are legitamately interested in serving the country? as opposed to plain old greedy people?

Agree (1) Alert moderator
Bard:

04 Dec 2008 10:08:20am

I'm all for equity......if top public servants are getting paid more than their Ministers then reduce their pay by $100k per year. SIMPLE.

Anyway, Ministers and MP's are basically chosen by either the Labor or the Liberal Party on nepotism and not talent.

Also the perks and benefits of retired politicians more than makes up for any inequities of office.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
John Herring:

04 Dec 2008 10:09:08am

More peanuts for the incompetent monkey's, get real, we are the most over governed country in the world and this would flow on to all the chimpanzees in the states.

How about we move to a system of non parliamentary ministers, ones which are really responsible to the people, not the political hack system we now have.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
The Zoo Keeper:

04 Dec 2008 10:09:23am

The old saying goes if you pay peanuts you get monkies. It seems to me that we already have too many monkies (and apes) running the country and the states, particularly NSW. If we pay lots and lots of peanuts we may, at the very least, get a better class of monkey.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Ian:

04 Dec 2008 10:09:27am

This has got to be a joke! So during these hard times when lots of people are going to lose jobs we are going to give another 100k pay rise to the polies..... Most people would just be happy with that as a salary.

Why not forgo the pay rise this year like most other Australians and give the money that would have gone to this pay rise to the elderly, those that actually need some money.... Stop being greedy.

Agree (1) Alert moderator
mrsmad:

04 Dec 2008 10:09:27am

Sad how this is the argument when it comes to members of parliaments pay. Though to retain the best nurses, teachers, police and any public sector worker, it is not considered. A maths teacher with a science degree say in maths, or engineering is what you want to teach your child. But how do you get them when you are offering 70 thousand than there colleagues are getting for a lot less hassle. How do you keep quality nurses in the wards when it pays more to be out of them. I have not issue with increasing politicians pay to what they are worth. However there needs to be a consistent measure on pays. To offer the public sector less than inflation and ourselves way above inflation seems a bit inconsitent. Is there not a half way point somewhere, as I am not pushing for huge increases in anyone's pays just a fair increase for all.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
mrt:

04 Dec 2008 10:09:30am

leave politicians pay where it is. Remove and/or reduce their additional benefits and lower substantially the wages of public servants. When that happens, most Australians will be reasonably happy with their lot

Agree (0) Alert moderator
llanfair:

04 Dec 2008 10:10:55am

Good idea, Give them a $100K pay-rise, and scrap the Parlimentary Superannuation Scheme. It is ludicrous having such a scheme in this day and age.

While we are at it we should also bring in term limits, so we stop have the same old party hacks hanging around.

Most companies turn over their CEOs after 5-8 years because if they haven't achieved all they can achieve in that time they never will. Unfortunately our Parliaments are full of people who never will!

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Gilligan:

04 Dec 2008 10:11:08am

Shouldn't the report focus on the total cost of employment ie the total benefit paid to the member?

In the private sector we have performance reviews, twice a year in many cases. Non performance means no job not a sinecure for life as for most pollies.

I guess it comes down to a simple choice doesn't it? If you want to earn lots of money you compete for work in the private sector if you want to be a politician you know that you get a decent standard of living but maybe not make millions, your choice!

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Bruce:

04 Dec 2008 10:12:32am

What has training and understanding of stragegies got to do with it ? Politicians are people who win stacked pre selections.
If we are to talk renumeration, perhaps we should first talk about the qualities we want in politicians. Do we want people who would otherwise run companies or governement departments ? Not necessarily. Basically a politician needs to be someone who decides where we should spend money, who we take it from and what the government should intervene in when it makes laws. These decisions dont necessarily require people who would otherwsie be earning lots of money.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Big Yin:

04 Dec 2008 10:15:51am

No they don't!!!!!!!! They're amply rewarded for spewing out their advisors' advice, what with salary, expenses & perks Their snouts are deep enough in the trough as it is!

Agree (0) Alert moderator
D Philp:

04 Dec 2008 10:17:17am

instead of raising the pay by $100, 000 for cabinet ministers, try lowering the pay of top public servants. that will equal it all up. regardless of what they earn already, any salary of above $100,000 can easily be regarded as sufficient to anyones needs. as for attracting the best talent to the job, it should be a willingness to work for the better for your country that guarentees quality and an 'understanding the various stratigies' rather that a thirst for money. although higher pay helps, its not the answer, otherwise raise all our pay, our jobs are just as critical to the nation as those that work in and for the government.

Agree (1) Alert moderator
Taipan:

04 Dec 2008 10:20:34am

I'd agree with significan payrises for ministers and members of parliament when:

1. They go through a rigorous selection process and can prove they are competent and qualified for the position,
2. They are subject to compentency reviews,
3. They can show value for money,
4. The path to politics is not determined by a party selection process in a blue ribbon seat, and
5. The remainder of their remuneration package is consitent with the rest of the community, for example, superannuation

Until then, I believe there are enough perks during and after their political careers to cover any apparent shortfalls. They enter politics knowing the salary, if they don't like the salary, don't enter politics.

I remember bitterly, a useless college tutor who went on to be an equally useless deputy prime minister.

Agree (1) Alert moderator
Frank:

04 Dec 2008 10:23:23am

And where is the evidence that there are not enough suitable applicants for these jobs? Don't we elect our polititians to parliament based on their qualifications?
As for the comparision with the canberra fat cats salaries. One man called Rudd had no problem with giving up a fat cat job to be a polititian, or was tha just because he was a kept man?

Agree (0) Alert moderator
ANTHONY:

04 Dec 2008 10:30:26am

RCL - The private sector get paid very well for their failures. Top public servants are the ones who are the brains behind government. We have to attract them, the polies listen and legislate!

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Don:

04 Dec 2008 10:31:22am

If politicians pay is to be based on commercial rates then perks after politics would also need to cease. e.g. gold cards

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Apples vs Oranges:

04 Dec 2008 10:33:31am

I note that the article only refers to "base salary", it does not factor in all of the other perks and benefits - particularly the overly generous superannuation payments and the ridiculous travel benefits that none of the rest of us get. Even the top public servants don't get all of this, so they're hardly comparing apples with apples.

It's worth adding also that in the private sector we have no certainty about our jobs in these troubled times, but the pollies have absolute job protection until the next election comes along. There should absolutely be a premium paid for the added risk around job security for private sector workers.

I'm a bit tired of pollies whining about their remuneration when the "non cash" benefits they receive are second to none in Australia. Maybe we should introduce performance-based pay.
> "No bonus this year Mr Swan, given you didn't meet your budget targets."

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Ben:

04 Dec 2008 10:34:16am

If the top public servants are getting paid more than the politicians, then reduce the pay of the public servants. It would seem a bit hypocritical to give a pay rise of that much when the government(s) negotiates for months on end over pay disputes with nurses, police, teachers...

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Lindsay Cooper:

04 Dec 2008 10:36:27am

You are surely jesting, maybe should look at reducing the salary of top public servants. Makes more sense.

This is the usual pigish grab, lets get a pay rise before we start telling everybody else that they have to tighten their belts because of the finacial crisis.

(Oh!!! that financial crisis, isn't that just for the ordinary people, we talented ones are not included in that common mob are we.?)

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Jeremy:

04 Dec 2008 10:36:33am

Clearly this report shows that the top public servants are grossly over paid, not that politicians are over paid.

Being a politician shouldn't be about personal gain, it should be about what that person can do for the country, and as such, there is no need to try and recruit people who are mainly interested in personal gain.

Agree (1) Alert moderator
shrambo:

04 Dec 2008 10:40:37am

What? Can't survive on 200k p.a. boo hoo

Agree (1) Alert moderator
HP:

04 Dec 2008 10:44:07am

While I agree that it reeks of hypocrisy to give yourself a massive pay rise while asking everyone else to tighten their belts, I think that politicians need to be as well paid as possible to make them less susceptible to bribes and corruption.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
unfoiled:

04 Dec 2008 10:44:56am

This is beyond belief.
Imagine the extra superannuation they will collect when they leave and they leave so easily.
More tax from the Australian people!
Shocking!

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Mike:

04 Dec 2008 10:48:36am

Public servants get more than our politicians simply because its them that do the work. The politicians rely on the public service to do all the work, write all their speeches and provide them with their expert advice. In reality although it seems they work hard its those behind the scenes that are the real workers.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
neil:

04 Dec 2008 10:48:57am

Let's face it, most pollies getting into the game are not in it for the money, but for power, ideology and networks.

Many do very well for themselves outside of politics (if they so choose) because of the experience and business contacts they make.

As for the power and ideology, they should be paying us for foisting their petty world view on us!

It's easy to blame bankers and financiers for the current crisis, but ultimately, it's the politicians policies that should protect against what is happening. Otherwise, what else are they good for? And all the talk of peace and making a better world, and their performance in parliament shows them to be extremely rude, arrogant and violent people.

Yes, very, very petty!

Agree (1) Alert moderator
Graham:

04 Dec 2008 10:50:47am

Pollies are popularly elected..not necessarily for their qualifications. Now if they could apply for the job, just like any other, and be employed for their qualifications, experience and abilities then that would be a different thing. Oops sounds like I'm talking about those civil servants!

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Brendan:

04 Dec 2008 10:54:17am

I seem to recall Bob Hawke using the 'peanuts/monkeys/attract a better standard of pollie' argument back in the Eighties to garner pollies a substantial raise while the rest of the nation was on a wage rise freeze.

They got their raise and guess what, we kept the same substandard bunch of money grubbing monkeys. I suggest we go back and study all their election speeches and hold them to their "I am doing it because I want to serve the nation" statements.

No pay rise, they ALL tell us they got into politics for altruistic reasons.

Agree (0) Alert moderator
Di:

04 Dec 2008 10:54:38am<

Ministers deserve $100k pay rise: report

Search for news

Comments (101)

RCL:

Warren:

cliff:

Skeptical:

chalkie:

mark:

chalkie:

Jim H:

Ben:

Kocsonya:

praedus:

Warren:

Jeremy:

Warren:

Trent:

DeepFritz:

Suncoast:

Remark:

Mark:

Remark:

Jeremy:

C Wallace:

PassTheButter:

vm:

Marty:

Patch:

m1scha:

Green:

gazza:

vm:

Hobbit:

Remark:

Warren:

Bullfrog:

David:

Mark:

vm:

Warren:

mrdavidlopan:

Bullfrog:

Homer:

Jeremy:

Lindsay Cooper:

Peter of Melbourne:

Suncoast:

Kocsonya:

lionel hurst:

Jo S:

Suncoast:

Jeremy:

Peter R:

davo:

Robert:

Jeff:

Patch:

Bard:

John Herring:

Paul:

Suncoast:

Warren:

Jeremy:

Warren:

The Zoo Keeper:

llanfair:

Ian:

mrsmad:

Warren:

mrsmad:

mrt:

llanfair:

hugh jampton:

Gilligan:

Bruce:

Big Yin:

Robert:

D Philp:

Taipan: