Page 2618 - Week 09 - Thursday, 8 August 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
we should live within our means, that we should have a fairer society and that she is concerned about social justice, I think we should not accept it. I call on other members to do the same.
MR DUBY (3.37): My speech is going to be very short and sweet. We have heard this claptrap from Mr Stevenson before. It is claptrap, Mr Stevenson. There was no pay rise. There was a determination of salary in the first place, and this was a final determination of salary for members of this Assembly. A preliminary assessment of some value was made in 1989; a further assessment was made later; and now we have the final determination of the salary levels that are appropriate for members of the Assembly of the ACT.
Mr Moore: And an interim allowance.
MR DUBY: And an interim allowance that has been supposedly backdated. I have heard enough of this claptrap about Mr Stevenson not taking the money, that he has not taken it since 1989 and that, instead, he spends it on postage. It is just utter rubbish.
Dennis, if you do not want to take it, you tell me what charity you are giving it to. If you are that adamant that it should not go to you, that it should not be used for political purposes, that it should be used for the good of the community, you tell me what charity you are going to give this excess money to - St Vinnie's, the Smith Family or whatever. The day you come to me and say, "There is the excess money that they paid me, over and above the money I originally got, and I have given it to charity", is the day that I might take you seriously. This is an absolute joke.
DR KINLOCH (3.38): I am not doubting your good intentions, Mr Stevenson; but I want you not to doubt our good intentions. I believe that we have just as much right to say that we also speak on behalf of the people of Canberra, and I believe that we speak on behalf of their long-term interests. That is, it is in their long-term interests to have the very best possible Legislative Assembly and the very best, most competent range of people.
There are a number of points. I take exception to the term "pay rise" in your statement. The Remuneration Tribunal has considered a number of factors and has determined what it regards as an appropriate level of remuneration, as Mr Duby has already said. Compared with other comparable legislatures, the amount awarded might just as easily be described not as a pay rise but as a pay fall. The amount awarded falls very far short of what most of us hoped it could and should have been if we looked at other legislatures throughout Australia. It is not a pay rise; it is a pay fall. So, the premise of Mr Stevenson's statement is incorrect.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .