Commonwealth of Australia Explanatory Memoranda Commonwealth of Australia Explanatory Memoranda[Index] [Search] [Download] [Bill] [Help]
1998-1999-2000-2001
The Parliament of the
Commonwealth of
Australia
Explanatory
Memorandum
ISBN: 0642 466513
Parliamentary (Choice of Superannuation) Bill 2001
Parliamentary (Choice of Superannuation) Bill
2001
The Bill amends the Parliamentary Contributory Superannuation Act 1948
(the Act) to give Senators and Members of the House of
Representatives the freedom to opt out of the compulsory parliamentary
superannuation scheme.
Retiring Members and Senators currently receive
superannuation benefits from the Commonwealth as contributors to the
Parliamentary Retiring Allowances Trust (the Trust) established under the Act.
From the first day a Senator or Member becomes entitled to a parliamentary
allowance he or she is automatically obliged to make contributions to the
Trust.
The Bill allows new Senators or Members to elect not to make
contributions to the Trust upon first taking office, and instead, to make
contributions to a complying superannuation fund or Retirement Savings Account
(RSA) of their choice. The Bill gives current Senators and Members the same
choice, but will also allow them to have any superannuation benefit accrued
under the parliamentary scheme rolled-over into a complying fund or RSA of their
choice[1]. Once a new, current, or
returning Senator or Member has exercised the right to choose not to make
contributions to the Trust, he or she will not be able to make such
contributions in the future.
If a Senator or Member elects to opt out of
the Parliamentary scheme, he or she will also have superannuation contributions
paid into their chosen fund or RSA by the Commonwealth. These contributions will
be made in accordance with the Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Act
1992.
The Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Act 1992
is the legislation under which the majority of Australian workers currently
have superannuation contributions made on their behalf by their employers.
Therefore, those Members or Senators who exercise the freedom of choice the Bill
provides will have their superannuation arrangements brought in line with those
applying to the wider community.
The Government currently has
legislation before the Senate designed to give employees greater choice and
control over their superannuation arrangements. Senators and Members are,
however, exempted from the Government’s proposed choice of fund
arrangements. By allowing Senators and Members to choose the complying fund or
RSA into which their contributions are paid, the Bill seeks to give
parliamentarians the same freedom of choice the Government has already sought to
give other workers.
The Bill will result in the funding of future superannuation accruals for
new and existing Senators and Members who elect to join another complying
superannuation fund or an RSA. It is difficult to estimate the outlays that
might be required as this will depend on how many Senators and Members choose
not to contribute to the Trust. However, any increased cash flows do not
represent additional costs to the Commonwealth.
Members and Senators
who opt out of the parliamentary scheme will reduce the Commonwealth’s
liability from an unfunded commitment to be paid out of consolidated revenue to
the amount required under the superannuation guarantee scheme (currently 8% of
salary).
Despite a Senate Inquiry in 1997 which concluded the parliamentary scheme
lacks transparency, is out of step with superannuation practice in the wider
community and is in some cases excessively generous, there appears to be no will
on the part of the Government or Opposition to reform the scheme.
The
parliamentary scheme had its origins in an era when people contemplating public
office were considered more likely to face job insecurity than the rest of the
workforce. However, in 2001 there is no such thing as ‘job security’
or a ‘job for life’ for the vast majority of the Australian workers.
The nature of modern parliamentary life means many ex-parliamentarians
are now at a competitive advantage when they re-enter the general workforce
after time in politics. The generosity of the parliamentary scheme and loopholes
in the legislation governing it allow some parliamentarians to access large
entitlements prior to reaching retirement age.
By giving Members and
Senators the freedom to opt out of the parliamentary scheme the Bill simply
implements one of the key conclusions reached by the Government members of the
Senate Select Committee on Superannuation in 1997.
On the 25th of November 1996 the Senate asked its Select Committee on
Superannuation to inquire and report on the appropriateness of the parliamentary
superannuation scheme[2].
The
Committee received 46 submissions and held three public hearings before handing
down its report on the 1st of September 1997. In its report entitled The
Parliamentary Contributory Superannuation Scheme and the Judges’ Pension
Scheme the Committee concluded that:
• change to the
parliamentary superannuation scheme was desirable;
• the scheme was
out of step with superannuation practice in the wider
community;
• the scheme lacked transparency and that this lack of
transparency gave rise to much of the public criticism it attracted; and
• there was convincing evidence the scheme was excessively
generous to a small group of retiring
parliamentarians.[3]
According
to its report:
‘The Committee agreed that the scheme has many
significant shortcomings. It does not necessarily serve its members well, may
be outdated in some of its provisions and attempts to achieve too much in
relation to what a superannuation scheme can fairly be expected to
provide.
There is also a lack of transparency in parliamentary
superannuation that gives rise to much of the criticism of the PCSS. Further,
there is also clearly a negative perception in the mind of the public about the
scheme, and an uneasy relationship between the PCSS and superannuation in the
broader community. In light of these findings, the Committee considers that
reform is
desirable.’[4]
Regarding
issues of flexibility, portability and choice the Committee
said:
‘The result of the inflexible nature of the PCSS is a lack
of choice for individual parliamentarians. In view of the increasing prospect
of new members bringing to their parliamentary life substantial superannuation
as a result of other employment, it seems inefficient as well as unnecessary to
be requiring them to contribute to a scheme which may result in them exceeding
the Reasonable Benefit Limits or exceeding their own superannuation requirements
...
The Committee also recognises the lack of portability involved
in the parliamentary scheme. While it is possible for a member of the PCSS to
purchase a notional past service which will be taken into account in determining
future entitlements under the PCSS, this option is generally not taken up.
Then, on leaving parliamentary service, there is no transferability of a PCSS
pension entitlement to another scheme.
One possible solution to
these dilemmas is for membership of the PCSS to be optional, to the extent that
every parliamentarian is a member until he or she opts
out.’[5]
Government
members of the Committee recommended, among other things, that upon taking
office new parliamentarians should be offered the choice of opting out of the
parliamentary scheme in favour of a fully funded accumulation scheme or
retirement savings account of their
choice.[6]
The Australian Labor
Party Members of the Committee did not recommend specific changes to the scheme
but concluded the Remuneration Tribunal was the appropriate body to make
recommendations for
reform.[7]
In a dissenting
report on behalf of the Australian Democrats, Senator Lyn Allison expressed the
view that the scheme was too generous and was in urgent need of
reform.[8]
On the 1st of
December 1997 the Minister for Finance the Hon. John Fahey formally responded to
the report in a letter to the Committee’s Chair Senator John Watson. In
his response the Minister stated that:
‘The Government welcomes
your Committee’s report on its inquiry into the superannuation
arrangements for parliamentarians and judges. I note the committee members were
all of the view that the Remuneration Tribunal should be involved in setting
parliamentary
superannuation.’[9]
The
Minister went on to say that the Government would give further consideration to
the Committee’s findings in the context of changes then proposed to the
way Members of Parliament were paid. These involved setting
parliamentarians’ remuneration by reference to classifications determined
by the Remuneration Tribunal, rather than by direct linkage to public service
Senior Executive Service salaries.
Following the 3rd of October 1998
Federal election it was revealed that 33 year old Queensland Senator Bill
O’Chee, who had lost his seat after nine years service, would leave
Parliament entitled to an indexed lifetime pension of approximately $45,000 a
year. On the 7th of October 1998, in response to the public outcry over these
revelations, the Minister for Finance was reported to have pledged to review the
Parliamentary Superannuation
Scheme.[10]
On the 12th of
November 1998, the Minister for Financial Services & Regulation the Hon. Joe
Hockey introduced to Parliament the Superannuation Legislation Amendment
(Choice of Superannuation Funds) Bill 1998. That Bill proposed to amend the
Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Act 1992 to give ordinary
employees a choice as to which fund their superannuation contributions are paid.
In his Second Reading Speech to the Bill the Minister said among other
things:
“The choice of fund arrangements are about giving
employees greater choice and control over their superannuation savings, which in
turn will give them greater sense of ownership of these savings. The
arrangements will increase competition and efficiency in the superannuation
industry, leading to improved returns on superannuation savings
...
The fundamentals of this reform are that employees get a
genuine choice as to which fund their superannuation is
paid.”[11]
This
legislation sought to implement a key recommendation of Stan Wallis’ 1997
report on the Australian Financial System. Recommendation 88 of that report
said in part:
‘Employees should be provided with choice of fund,
subject to any constraints necessary to address concerns about administrative
costs and funding
liquidity.’[12]
The
Government’s choice of superannuation legislation has been stalled in the
Senate since its introduction there in February 1999. However, parliamentarians
are currently excluded from the choice arrangements proposed by the
Government’s legislation. In other words, while the Government is of the
view that ordinary workers should have a genuine choice when it comes to their
superannuation arrangements, it has not sought to extend the same freedom of
choice to parliamentarians.
When asked in Parliament on the 24th of
November 1998 whether he supported a review of the parliamentary superannuation
scheme the Prime Minister replied: “I never close my mind to reviews of
superannuation, be it parliamentary or otherwise” but went on to
conclude “that you will never really solve the problem. I say to those
who have recently joined this place – I say this to people on both sides
– that if you imagine you will solve the anomalies of all this within a
short space of time, you will
not.”[13]
On the
8th of February 1999, in response to a Question on Notice seeking confirmation
about the review he was reported to have proposed, the Minister for Finance
said: “the Government has not decided at this time on any review of the
Parliamentary Superannuation Scheme.”
[14]
On the 9th of March
1999 in response to another Question without Notice the Prime Minister said:
“I have never ruled, nor has the Government ever ruled out, further
examination of parliamentary superannuation
arrangements.”[15]
On
the 7th of December 1999 the Remuneration Tribunal reported to the Government on
the remuneration of Senators and Members. In its report the Tribunal
recommended that the method for setting the remuneration of Members of
Parliament should no longer be linked to the salaries of Senior Executive
Service Commonwealth public servants. Instead, the Tribunal proposed a new base
payment for backbenchers ($90,000p.a) and Office Holders to be adjusted twice
yearly in accordance with increases in Average Weekly Ordinary Time Earnings
index (the AWOTE). The Tribunal concluded that with these changes it was
‘satisfied that the remuneration package for Senators and Members
(salary, superannuation, and vehicle) is now
competitive’.[16]
However, the Tribunal gave no justification as to why
parliamentarians’ superannuation arrangements were considered
appropriate.
Much of this section has been extracted from the 25th Report of the
Senate Select Committee on Superannuation, The Parliamentary Contributory
Superannuation Scheme & the Judges’ Pension Scheme. For full
details of the parliamentarians’ superannuation arrangements readers are
directed to that report[17].
The parliamentary superannuation scheme provides for the superannuation
benefits of Commonwealth parliamentarians. Membership is compulsory and member
contributions are required. Benefits are paid to former Members of Parliament
or, on their death, to their surviving spouse or orphan children.
The
scheme is administered by the Department of Finance under the direction of the
Parliamentary Retiring Allowances Trust. There are five trustees of the Trust
– the Minister for Finance who is the presiding trustee, plus two Senators
and two Members of the House of Representatives appointed by their respective
Houses.
The parliamentary superannuation scheme was established in 1948 under the
Parliamentary Contributory Superannuation Act of that year. Reasons for
the establishment of the scheme included:
• entering Parliament
often meant foregoing potential superannuation pay-outs from previous employers
due to leaving that employer prior to retirement age;
• electoral
or parliamentary demands reduced members’ chances to re-establish careers
when their parliamentary term was over; and
• the need to entice
people to enter Parliament who would not otherwise nominate.
When then
Prime Minister and Treasurer Ben Chifley introduced the legislation in 1948 he
said:
It has frequently been said that the loss and insecurity which
attend upon service in Parliament deter men and women capable of making a
worthwhile contribution to the service of the Commonwealth from offering
themselves for election. It is hoped that this measure will help in overcoming
difficulties of this
nature.[18]
Originally
the scheme was funded to the extent of the member contributions, and was framed
along the lines of the Commonwealth Public Service Superannuation
Scheme.
Contributions were three pounds per week (about 10.4 per cent of
salary) and a fixed annuity of eight pounds per week was payable when a member
qualified for a pension, an amount which, according to Prime Minister Chifley
was in 1948: “much less than the maximum pension provided under many
private and public superannuation
schemes”.[19]
Between
1948 and 1973, the main amendments to the scheme were:
• in 1955,
the three occasions rule was introduced (see below);
• from 1959,
the age at retirement became a factor in fixing the rate of
pension;
• orphan benefits were introduced in 1959;
and
• from 1963, pensions changed from a fixed amount to being
based on salary.
In 1973 the scheme underwent major changes. The fund
was abolished and its assets transferred to the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF).
Contributions were then paid into the CRF, out of which benefits were also
paid.
The maximum benefit payable to a member was increased from 50 per
cent to 75 per cent of the parliamentary salary payable, and pensions accrued
according to the length of service rather than age at retirement. Also, the
minimum age 40 requirement for the pension on involuntary retirement was
removed, and the minimum age on voluntary retirement was raised from 40 to 45
years (eventually removed in 1978). Provisions for invalidity pensions,
indexation of pensions and the recognition of State parliamentary service were
also introduced.
Since 1973, various amendments have been made including
the introduction of a 50 per cent commutation of pension option in 1978. This
option was increased to a 100 in 1979. Further changes in the same period
included:
• reducing the 100 per cent commutation option back to 50
per cent in 1983; and
• the provision for reducing a pension, on
the basis of the former parliamentarian receiving remuneration from an Office of
Profit under the Crown, was reintroduced in 1983 (it had been removed in
1973).
The level of the superannuation contributions made for parliamentarians
by the Commonwealth is set by the Parliamentary Contributory Superannuation
Act 1948. Members and Senators must contribute at the rate of 11.5 per cent
of their Parliamentary Allowances for the first 18 years in office and at 5.75
per cent for subsequent years. In addition, they must contribute the same
percentage of their Additional Office Holder Allowance if they hold a higher
office (such as ministerial).
The parliamentary scheme is also an
unfunded defined benefit scheme. ‘Unfunded’ means that the scheme
funds its benefit payments from annual Commonwealth appropriations.
‘Defined benefit’ means that members’ entitlements are, in
general, multiples of years of service and a percentage of salary. In such a
defined benefit scheme, the employer is responsible for providing the difference
between the benefit actually paid and what the member has contributed toward the
benefit.
Every three years the Australian Government Actuary provides
the Department of Finance with details of the long term cost to the Commonwealth
of funding parliamentarians’ superannuation. At each review, the notional
employer contribution rate is reported. This rate illustrates the effective
cost of parliamentary superannuation benefits as a percentage of the total
salaries of scheme members. As at the 30th of June 1996 the rate was 69.1 per
cent.[20] The Actuary has prepared
a subsequent report for the Department of Finance based on 30th of June 1999
figures, but has not released this information publicly.
Based on the
current allowance for backbenchers of $92,000, the 69.1 per cent figure means
that in order to fund a member’s superannuation benefits, the Commonwealth
effectively contributes the equivalent of $63,572 extra per year.
Compared to the majority of Australian workers this level of employer
contribution for superannuation is very generous. The generosity of the scheme
is demonstrated by comparing it with other superannuation schemes operated by
the Commonwealth for its public servants and the wider public. Based on the
1996 figures, under the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme (CSS) the notional
employer contribution was 23 per cent, while for the Public Sector
Superannuation Scheme (PSS) it was 13 per cent.
The generosity of the
parliamentary scheme is further demonstrated when it is compared with the level
of compulsory superannuation paid by most employers under the Superannuation
Guarantee (SG) scheme. The SG scheme requires all employers to make a minimum
superannuation contribution on behalf of employees (with limited exceptions).
For the year 2000-01 financial year the minimum level of employer support
superannuation is 8 per cent. When compared with the contributions under the
SG, the level of support parliamentarians receive is very generous as the
following table illustrates.
In 1994 the parliamentary superannuation scheme was amended to make it
subject to the same preservation rules applying to other superannuation funds.
New preservation rules, administered by the Australian Prudential Regulation
Authority, took effect from 1 July 1999. From this date, all superannuation
contributions (including member contributions) and superannuation fund
investment earnings have been preserved until fund members reach their
preservation ages[21].
In
the 1997 Budget the Government announced that the preservation age would be
increased from 55 to 60 on a phased in basis. By 2025, the preservation age
will be 60 years for anyone born after June 1964, with the age 60 preservation
age being reduced by one year for each year that person’s birthday is
before 1 July 1964. This means that a person born before 1 July 1960 will
continue to have a preservation age of 55.
Preserved superannuation
benefits can be accessed on limited compassionate and severe financial hardship
grounds. However, under the new preservation rules, a person continues to be
allowed to have early access to preserved benefits where they are taken in the
form of a non-commutable[22]
lifetime pension or annuity on termination of gainful employment. It is this
feature which allows parliamentarians to gain early access to their
superannuation entitlements. Such early access is, however, generally not an
option for most other workers until they are very close to
retirement.
This is because the generosity of the Parliamentary Scheme
(69.1 per cent of salary) provides Members and Senators with a much larger
entitlement after 8 or 12 years of service compared with a worker only receiving
the SG minimum amount (currently 8 per cent of salary). Logically, the
generosity of the parliamentary scheme ensures that on conclusion of his or her
parliamentary service, a Senator or Member can access a much larger
non-commutable lifetime pension or annuity than other workers.
Further,
although the preservation rules permit early access only in the form of
non-commutable pensions, the parliamentary scheme continues to allow
parliamentarians to take up to 50 per cent of their pension in a lump sum prior
to reaching preservation age[23].
This arrangement is directly at odds with those applying to the general
workforce who may not access their superannuation prior to reaching preservation
age unless the benefits are taken in the form of a lifetime pension or
annuity.
Clause 1 – Short title
Clause 1 provides for
the short title of the Act to be Parliamentary (Choice of Superannuation) Act
2001.
Clause 2 – Commencement
Subclause
2(1) provides for the Act to commence on the day that it is proclaimed.
However, choice decisions under the Act will not be able to be made until 1 July
2001 under new section 4F.
Subclause 2(2) provides that the
proclamation cannot be made unless the Parliament has appropriated funds for the
purposes of the Act.
This measure is necessary because a private Member
may not introduce a bill requiring the appropriation of public revenue, as an
appropriation must first be recommended to the House by message of the
Governor-General. This requirement reflects the constitutional and parliamentary
principle of the financial initiative of the Crown. As Parliament considers the
Bill it may then provide for the appropriation of funds for the payments to be
made to the superannuation funds or RSAs of the Members of Parliament who choose
not to make contributions to the Parliamentary Retiring Allowances Trust (the
Trust). After the appropriation is made the proclamation can be
issued.
Clause 3 – Schedule
Clause 3
provides that the Acts specified in the schedule are amended or repealed as set
out in the applicable items in the Schedule.
Schedule 1 –
Amendment of the Parliamentary Contributory Superannuation Act
1948
Item 1 – Subsection 4(1) definition of
member
Item 1 repeals the existing definition of
member and replaces it with a new extended
definition.
Item 2 – Subsection 4(1) definition of non
Trust contributor
Item 2 inserts a definition of the term
non Trust contributor.
Item 3 – Paragraph
4(4A)(aa) deeming a Member of Parliament to be employed by the
Commonwealth
Item 3 repeals the existing deeming provision and
replaces it with a new extended provision.
Item 4 – New
sections 4F and 4G provision of choice of superannuation fund and providing for
Commonwealth contributions to the chosen fund
Item 4 inserts
new section 4F into the Act to enable a Senator or Member to choose not
to contribute to the Trust. New subsection 4F(1) provides that a Member
of Parliament may continue to be or become a member of another complying
superannuation fund or the holder of a Retirement Savings Account (an
RSA).
New subsection 4F(2) provides that a Senator or Member may
not cease to contribute to the Trust until 1 July 2001. New paragraph
4F(2)(a) requires a Member or Senator’s decision to be given in
writing to the Trust and stipulates that if written notice is given, the
earliest the Senator or Member could become a non Trust contributor is the date
of that written notice.
New paragraph 4F(2)(b) applies to new
Senators and Members, and allows them to forgo being a contributor to the Trust
upon first entering parliament.
New subsection 4F(3) allows
Senators or Members to make their decision to opt out on first becoming entitled
to a parliamentary allowance or at any time they are a Member of Parliament. A
parliamentary allowance is any allowance as defined by section 4(1) of the Act
and is typically payable to a Member or Senator from and including the day of
his or her election to office.
New subsection 4F(4) stipulates
that once a Member or Senator has exercised their choice under the Act, they
must maintain membership of a complying superannuation fund or be the holder of
an RSA for the whole time they remain a Member of Parliament.
New
subsection 4F(5) has the effect that once a Member or Senator exercises
their choice under the Act, they will not be able to reverse their decision. The
decision to opt out of contributing to the Trust will be
permanent.
New subsection 4F(6) provides for definitions of
complying superannuation fund and RSA.
New section 4G compels the
Commonwealth to make contributions for the benefit of non Trust contributors, to
the complying superannuation fund or RSA chosen by the individual Senator or
Member, in accordance with the Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Act
1992. This measure means that Members and Senators who choose not to
contribute to the Trust will have superannuation contributions paid on their
behalf by the Commonwealth at the minimum rate payable under the superannuation
guarantee scheme.
Item 5 – Subsection 13(9)
definitions
Item 5 repeals the existing definition provision
for section 13 and replaces it with a new extended provision. In new
subsection 13(9) definitions of Minister of State,
office holder and person applying only in section 13
have been inserted. Each definition has a common requirement for the person to
be a contributor to the Trust. The effect of the definitions is to limit the
scope of section 13 to those persons entitled to a parliamentary allowance,
Ministers of State and office holders who make contributions to the Trust. Those
persons who elect not to make contributions to the Trust are excluded from the
requirement to make contributions.
Item 6 – Section 18A
benefits for members who cease to make contributions to the
Trust
Item 6 inserts new section 18A into the Act
stating that the only benefit for Senators and Members who choose to stop making
contributions to the Trust is the superannuation guarantee safety-net amount.
However, as is the case for all other employees, this benefit must be rolled
over into the complying superannuation fund or Retirement Savings Account of the
Senator or Member.
The superannuation guarantee safety-net amount has the
meaning given by section 16A of the Act.
[1] The Bill proposes that a Member
or Senator’s benefit on exercising their choice to opt out of the Trust
will be the ‘superannuation guarantee safety-net amount’ as defined
by section 16A of the Act.
[2] The
full Terms of Reference the Committee was asked to inquire and report on
were:
1) The appropriateness of the current unfunded defined benefit
superannuation schemes’ application to judges and parliamentarians,
including but limited to:
(a) the equity between members;
(a) the cost
to the Commonwealth and members;
(a) the impact of unfunded liabilities on
future budgets;
(a) the advantage or otherwise of member choice of fund or
investment strategy;
(a) the flexibility of existing schemes, including in
respect of portability, in the context of their working arrangements and those
applying in the general work force;
(a) the appropriateness of replacing such
schemes with a fully-funded accumulation scheme;
(a) the appropriateness of
the application of preservation rules and taxation on benefits taken prior to
age 55 to such schemes;
(a) the capacity for making superannuation
arrangements less complex than current arrangements; and
(a) the
administrative cost of such arrangements and their alternatives.
2)
That for the purpose of the inquiry the committee take evidence from the public,
Government agencies and State, Territory and Federal government departments, and
conduct public hearings as
appropriate.
[3] The
Parliamentary Contributory Superannuation Scheme & Judges Pension
Scheme, Senate Select Committee on Superannuation, 25th Report,
Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, 1st September
1997, p. 41.
[4] The
Parliamentary Contributory Superannuation Scheme & Judges Pension
Scheme, Senate Select Committee on Superannuation, 25th Report,
Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, 1st September
1997, p.3.
[5] ibid, at
p.27.
[6] ibid, at
p.42.
[7] ibid, at
p.43.
[8] Senator Lyn Allison,
Dissenting Report, Senate Select Committee on Superannuation, 25th
Report, The Parliamentary Contributory Superannuation Scheme & Judges
Pension Scheme, Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, 1st
September 1997, p.1.
[9] The Hon.
John Fahey, Minister for Finance, Government Response to Senate Select Committee
on Superannuation’s, 25th Report, The Parliamentary
Contributory Superannuation Scheme & Judges Pension Scheme,
1st December
1997.
[10] Peatling, Stefanie,
“Fahey Pledges Super Review”, Sydney Morning Herald,
7th October 1998,
p.10.
[11] The Hon. Joseph
Hockey, Minister for Financial Services and Regulation, House of Representative
Hansard, 12th November 1998,
p.261.
[12] Australian
Financial System Inquiry, Final Report (Wallis Report), Canberra, Australian
Government Publishing Service, March
1997.
[13]The Hon. John Howard,
Prime Minister, House of Representatives Hansard, 24th November 1998,
p.481.
[14]The Hon. John Fahey,
Minister for Finance and Administration, House of Representatives Hansard,
8th February 1999,
p.2165.
[15]The Hon. John Howard,
Prime Minister, House of Representatives Hansard, 9th March 1999,
p.3443.
[16]Report on
Senators and Members of Parliament, Ministers and Holders of Parliamentary
Office – Salaries and Allowances For Expenses of Office, Remuneration
Tribunal, December 1999, p.10.
[17] The Parliamentary
Contributory Superannuation Scheme and Judges Pension Scheme, Senate Select
Committee on Superannuation, 25th Report, Parliament of the
Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, 1st September
1997.
[18] The Hon. Ben Chifley,
Prime Minister and Treasurer, House of Representatives Hansard, 1st
December 1948, p. 3738.
[19]ibid,
at p. 3739.
[20] The
Parliamentary Contributory Superannuation Scheme & Judges Pension
Scheme, Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia, 1st
September 1997, p. 15.
[21]
Preservation Age is the age at which a fund member can gain access to benefits
that have accumulated in a superannuation fund or RSA, provided the member has
permanently retired from the
workforce.
[22] Commutation
refers to the taking of a benefit in a lump
sum.
[23] Parliamentary
Contributory Superannuation Act 1948 Cth, Section 18B.