ALP Doomed but how many seats will they get?

In case you wondered, and ex Prime Minster who retire, be they Liberal or Labour gets the following:

An annual pension of $371,572.50. However, legislation to prevent windfall superannuation gains following massive pay rises for politicians last year modifies the payout to about $200,000 a year, indexed.

An office,

staff ( does not say if one or more?

a car and

a lifetime Gold Pass entitling them to free air travel.

I assume the partner gets some of these benefits as well.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...of-her-life-20130627-2p09z.html#ixzz2XSyO0PLL

So I say this as a bipartisan statement........ someone "retiring" at 51 with a law degree and links to be invited to join many boards, NGO, etc.. and be paid again, if not going to be hard up for a buck.

IMO They do not need or deserve the generous condition above and for three years of service. They should, like us be encouraged to put away super for their retirement and build their resume. The car, office, free air fare is excessive and an insult to pensioners wrapped in blankets because they cannot afford to heat their homes anymore.

Any party willing to stop that?

Regards Peter
 
Peter 14.7 said:
Any party willing to stop that?
Click to expand...

I'd recommend not.

As with everything, there are two ways of looking at the same subject.

If you pop your union flag waving Melbourne dockyard worker hat on, the benefits are totally outrageous and she should get nothing. As we all know, all politicians suck big time, they are all leeches and deserve to go to purgatory in chains and die a horrible death.

If you pop your corporate hat on for a moment, these Federal MPs would most likely all be CEOs in corporations and be able to command salaries and benefits 10, maybe 20, maybe 100 times what the PM gets paid.

Some corporate high flyers laugh and scoff at the piddling amounts the Prime Minister is paid whilst in office.

You've got that eternal Australian conundrum where the general populace reckon the quality of people in Parliament are atrocious, they all do nothing and are all rotten to the core.....but then when you ask them how much they'd be willing to pay to get some good folk in there, I gather they wouldn't be prepared to pay them any more than casual waiting staff at the local café.

Of course, they are kidding themselves.

Twenty years ago as a roughneck on an oil rig working flat out in the desert covered in cr@p all day, I took solace in knowing I was paid more than Keating as the PM. Nothing seems to have changed.

I suspect you'll find if you scratch below the surface, the vast majority of the MPs aren't there for the money. That is a very minor consideration.....and yet the average Joe on the street will still moan and complain about the exhorbitant pay rates etc etc.

This gets back to that Aussie "fair go" thing. The local gardener or taxi driver or waitress wants to be on the same wicket as the Prime Minister, but obviously doesn't carry the same weight of responsibility or private intrusion.

I don't see many average workers willing to have the media camped outside their home asking stupid questions to their family members at all hours of the night.

Rant over.
 
Dazz,

I agree with your call re what they should be paid, which is more when in the job.

I disagree with the overly generous super payout and perks. No company would pay for free air fare, office, car for an ex CEO for the rest of their life. Super at 66% final salary indexed for life!

I disagree that all Pollies have the ability to run corporate organisation. I would say 33% would, 33% are middle at best and another 33% (who never don't anything other than a staffer or union official) have limited real skills.

Take away their ability to network solution via contacts and what do they have? IF they are that good, how come so many enter parliament with little real wealth. And why don't those leaving start businesses other than consulting?

Sure, pay them more and hope better minds will apply but the system rewards longevity not ability as I see it.

Alway enjoy your posts, Peter:)
 
I don't think many understand the impact of being a former Prime Minister. You get all sorts wanting some of your time - charity gigs, speeches, functions, rallying etc etc etc. John Howard will be at a rally with Tony Abbott on the weekend, to take just one example.

Prime Ministers get locked into serving their country for the rest of their lives by default of their position and status. They get paid a relative pittance whilst in office compared to their responsibilities.

They need staff to help them handle all the calls on their time, as well as the ability to travel to relevant events - state funerals, memorials, etc etc. And they deserve to be able to enjoy their own time in between having pretty much devoted their working lives to serving their nation.

I don't disagree with any of this. To my mind it only goes some way to compensating them for the intrusion on their private lives that being a former Prime Minister will always represent. It's hardly attractive enough that anyone would ever seek high office just to make money - the corporate world has much better prospects for that, for much less work required.
 
In reply HE, the super was so good because in the old days it was assumed you would have upset everyone and you gave up a viable business / job to enter parliament and could not return to it. It was also based as well a lower life expectancy and shorter working period on leaving.

Nowadays for most, being a pollie is ticket to easy cash in contacts after, and I understand, if they contest and lose an election they get redundancy payout, because they lost their job. I read for most it is in the order of $180,000 payout.

Then you get the likes of Bob Carr, Leave as NSW Premier and gets an reported $500k a year consultancy with Macquarie Bank.

To me they are having it both ways. massive payout and then using their connections to get outcomes for big companies for even more money. Should they be banned from a lobby role? Seems to be fair. If we want fairer, better Pollies pay them well for the job at hand but not well afterwards for the privilege or inconvenience.

Peter
 
Paying pollies a lot is never a good look in and of itself but I don't have a big issue with it given that it really is small money in the scheme of things. Welfare rorting is a far bigger problem where savings can be made.
 
There is no job in all of Australia that I would rather do less.

Even with the prime ministers I haven't been so fond of, I've admired their ability to not have a nervous breakdown under the stress and constant scrutiny. I wouldn't last a week being relentlessly hounded by the media and torn to bits by the opposition whilst every Tom, Dick and Harry in the country dissected me, pondering aloud my every flaw and misstep around the water cooler.

So they get some perks when they retire? I still wouldn't want to trade places with them.

Luckily for me, there seems no great demand for my prowess in politics.
 
Dazz said:
I'd recommend not.

As with everything, there are two ways of looking at the same subject.

If you pop your union flag waving Melbourne dockyard worker hat on, the benefits are totally outrageous and she should get nothing. As we all know, all politicians suck big time, they are all leeches and deserve to go to purgatory in chains and die a horrible death.

If you pop your corporate hat on for a moment, these Federal MPs would most likely all be CEOs in corporations and be able to command salaries and benefits 10, maybe 20, maybe 100 times what the PM gets paid.

Some corporate high flyers laugh and scoff at the piddling amounts the Prime Minister is paid whilst in office.

You've got that eternal Australian conundrum where the general populace reckon the quality of people in Parliament are atrocious, they all do nothing and are all rotten to the core.....but then when you ask them how much they'd be willing to pay to get some good folk in there, I gather they wouldn't be prepared to pay them any more than casual waiting staff at the local café.

Of course, they are kidding themselves.

Twenty years ago as a roughneck on an oil rig working flat out in the desert covered in cr@p all day, I took solace in knowing I was paid more than Keating as the PM. Nothing seems to have changed.

I suspect you'll find if you scratch below the surface, the vast majority of the MPs aren't there for the money. That is a very minor consideration.....and yet the average Joe on the street will still moan and complain about the exhorbitant pay rates etc etc.

This gets back to that Aussie "fair go" thing. The local gardener or taxi driver or waitress wants to be on the same wicket as the Prime Minister, but obviously doesn't carry the same weight of responsibility or private intrusion.

I don't see many average workers willing to have the media camped outside their home asking stupid questions to their family members at all hours of the night.

Rant over.
Click to expand...

Kudos. Agree with all of that.
 
Fifth said:
There is no job in all of Australia that I would rather do less.

Even with the prime ministers I haven't been so fond of, I've admired their ability to not have a nervous breakdown under the stress and constant scrutiny. I wouldn't last a week being relentlessly hounded by the media and torn to bits by the opposition whilst every Tom, Dick and Harry in the country dissected me, pondering aloud my every flaw and misstep around the water cooler.

So they get some perks when they retire? I still wouldn't want to trade places with them.

Luckily for me, there seems no great demand for my prowess in politics.
Click to expand...

In my experience those who become Pollie love the job. The social, the power, the Tom, Dick etc..and if they are genuine they can set the agenda on how they are perceived and treated.

It is when they are Hypocritical that the issues arise. Saying "respect my family privacy call" and then doing article in New Idea with a happy at home and kids spread makes you a open target.

I think most of us would hate being a Pollie.

Peter
 
In response Peter, I would prefer ex-PMs to never have to seek work in the private sector. But I also don't want their talents wasted or freedoms diminished on account of their service so I would oppose any restrictions on their ability to act in any lawful position in society following their service.

But I agree the situation with Bob Carr made me very uneasy. While I wouldn't support legislation banning him from a role like that, I do believe the fact he took on such a role does reflect on his character. Particularly when he would have been well aware of the corrupt core of the NSW Labor government at the time. For me, both he and Macquarie are tainted by the smell emanating from Sussex St which has been on display for everyone to see in recent years.

But ultimately it is for the people to hold (both current and ex) politicians to account when they use their status in this manner. While there were a few voices here and there expressing their disquiet, the main problem (as always) was the Australian public's complete disengagement from the political process - often they just don't care enough to be outraged at this sort of thing. If we cared enough, this sort of thing couldn't happen through the weight of public opinion.

The sad fact is that we clearly don't care enough - so we get the politicians we deserve. But this can be changed, if we want it to change!
 
Dazz said:
Turn it up - are you kidding or what ??

You can't see a difference between the Prime Minister of the country and the Maylands librarian's assistant for example ??
Click to expand...

Sure can.

But it's a case of their choice using our money.

The super/pension bit is the one that really pisses me off.

It's a case of "do as they say" not "do as they do".

We are the shareholders and they are the board running this country.

Retire at age 51 (or whatever) and they can then get a gig on several company boards, great for them.

I agree that if they were in the corporate world (which funnily enough retired MPs sort of end up there in some way or another as others have said) they would get huge million dollar payouts when they retire or are booted and then they can move onto the next company. Again, shareholders are happy to pay these numbers.

But MP super was made to be generous because when they use to retire they would retire, having upset all before them and would be unemployable.

Different in this corporate age.
 
Australia's politicians set for $4500 pay rise

AUSTRALIA'S federal politicians are set to enjoy a 2.4% pay rise within a month, meaning their annual salaries will have jumped by almost $55,000 in less than 18 months.

And believe it or not, there is a chance there could be more to come later this year. The pay rise, announced by the Remuneration Tribunal on Thursday, also applies to senior commonwealth public servants.

From July 1, a backbencher will receive an annual salary of $195,123 - not including other entitlements - an increase of more than $4500 per year.

Federal politicians received two pay rises last year totalling almost $50,000 - one of $44,000 in March and $5500 (3%) three months later.

The latest decision comes just a week after the country's lowest paid workers were granted a 2.6% boost - a rise of $15.80 a week to $622.

Little wonder people hate politicians.

And, imho, what separates most politicians from most people - is not that they are any more intelligent... they're just a alot more rat cunning.
 
Mark_B said:
Australia's politicians set for $4500 pay rise

AUSTRALIA'S federal politicians are set to enjoy a 2.4% pay rise within a month, meaning their annual salaries will have jumped by almost $55,000 in less than 18 months.

And believe it or not, there is a chance there could be more to come later this year. The pay rise, announced by the Remuneration Tribunal on Thursday, also applies to senior commonwealth public servants.

From July 1, a backbencher will receive an annual salary of $195,123 - not including other entitlements - an increase of more than $4500 per year.

Federal politicians received two pay rises last year totalling almost $50,000 - one of $44,000 in March and $5500 (3%) three months later.

The latest decision comes just a week after the country's lowest paid workers were granted a 2.6% boost - a rise of $15.80 a week to $622.

Little wonder people hate politicians.

And, imho, what separates most politicians from most people - is not that they are any more intelligent... they're just a alot more rat cunning.
Click to expand...

Ok to confuse most, I support this rise IF they lost the overly generous benefits. GOld Card this and that, etcccccc I belvie they did.

Ignoring skill and ability but applying duties/ responsibility and stress any back bencher should be paid $200k IMO.

Peter
 
Peter 14.7 said:
Ignoring skill and ability but applying duties/ responsibility and stress any back bencher should be paid $200k IMO.
Click to expand...

If they were there on merit, yes.

But a fair percentage of these people get doors opened for them because of who they know and the bums they've licked and babies they've kissed [hopefully before the bums] along the way (Keating, for one, was manifestly unqualified to be CFO of Australia, let alone CEO of Australia - but he held sway in and had powerful friends in the ALP).

Here's a novel idea... performance pay for politicians....

Canberra is such an ivory tower...

I know, I've seen the view.
 
Maybe even 'IF' the the new free thinking parties get even a very slim % then it will be no different from today hung,,,just paid my Palmer party membership yesterday never under estimate something as this..
 
willair said:
...just paid my Palmer party membership yesterday never under estimate something as this..
Click to expand...

I don't care how much money he has in the bank or in mining tenements (or wherever he chooses to keep it), I could never vote for someone and ask them to look after Australia (if only at a small level) if they so obviously cannot look after themselves.

(Yes, that is a reference to Mr Palmer's very large girth).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Peter 14.7
Game Change: Bob Carr as backup PM?
2 3
Replies
44
Views
5K
The Fence
T
Back
Top