Page 3000 - Week 10 - Thursday, 16 August 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Connolly: It is very relevant, Mr Speaker. You should be ashamed of yourself.
MR SPEAKER: Thank you for that interjection, Mr Connolly.
DR KINLOCH (3.54): Mr Speaker, in Mr Kaine's absence I want to make one point very clear. It has been made, but I want to re-emphasise it, in relation to something that the Leader of the Opposition said. I understand Ms Follett's comments, but the Chief Minister is honouring an accord that was due to have been concluded much earlier than this time. Those of us who put our signatures to that accord are of the belief that that is now being honoured.
I do not really like the reference to the 30 pieces of silver. That is not it at all. I am not a candidate or applicant for one of these ministerships; indeed, if offered, I would not take it. I am very content and happy to be on those excellent committees with Bill Wood, Ellnor Grassby, Dennis Stevenson, Robyn Nolan, Carmel Maher, Bill Stefaniak and others. That is what I like about this Assembly most, and that is what I propose to keep on doing.
Indeed, you could say that those of us who are anxious to have two more Ministers - never mind one - are engaging in a kind of power play because we want to be on more committees because that is where the real, gutsy work of this place is done. So I do not see 30 pieces of silver, nor do I see that we are putting snouts in the trough. Frankly, if many of us in this room were in the market for what we are worth - let me be very careful about this - we would have salaries of about - and I do not exaggerate - $80,000, $90,000 or $100,000 a year. As it is, we have salaries which certainly keep us comfortably but which cannot in any way be seen as snout in the trough salaries. Indeed, I would say that some of the members, backbenchers in particular, could easily walk out of this place and double their salaries overnight. So I do not see this marginal increase in costs as a factor. Similarly, for lurks and perks: what lurks and perks, I ask? A 15-hour day, seven-day week? That is the sort of thing that we all do, do we not? I recognise the workload problem. I recognised it when the Labor Party was in government, and I recognise it now. Let us say some new party called the Informal Party wins the next election in 1992 - I suggest that name to anyone who is welcome to borrow it - with nine seats.
Mr Moore: They would turn around and become the Formal Party and take government.
DR KINLOCH: Indeed, they probably would. I would argue that, by having six Ministers, the Informal Party would be more efficient than if it had four Ministers. So I do think it is a question of workload, of honouring a commitment, and not of troughs in snouts or vice versa.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .