Page 1804 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 15 June 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
There is no question that the amendments in the Audit Bill do move us into an area of greater risk in investment than has been the case previously. Madam Speaker, it is appropriate, therefore, for us, as members of the Assembly, to ensure that community assets, particularly assets to do with superannuation, are protected. For that reason I was delighted to support the idea that the Bill be amended to specify that contracts with external fund managers be limited to 5 per cent of all the moneys invested. Even with that 5 per cent, Madam Speaker, it is my understanding that losses well over the 5 per cent, and even beyond that amount again, could be incurred. So I think that that is a sensible amendment - an amendment that would make the community feel far more at ease about investing in this way.
There is another issue that I would like to raise at this point and that I think is of concern to all members who have expressed the desire to see more jobs in the ACT. I think I have heard from almost all members that employment is a No. 1 issue facing all members of the Assembly and our community as a whole. I asked Professor Barton a question about this issue and investment when he appeared before the committee. The question had to do with an interest in investing and in providing jobs. Professor Barton's reply included these words, and I quote from the draft Hansard report of that hearing:
... I would certainly argue that they are denying investment funds - the channelling of investment funds into productive investments which are employment generating and benefit the entire community. So, I think it is - it can be a gross misallocation of scarce capital resources.
What Professor Barton is saying, Madam Speaker, is that if we set employment as our highest priority such funds ought not be invested in speculative areas but ought be invested in solid employment opportunities, in productive enterprises. I think that even in supporting this Bill, as the committee has done, it is appropriate to raise that issue so that the Chief Minister, in particular, is aware that in allowing even 5 per cent of moneys to be invested it is actually taking - - -
Mr Kaine: It is $20m.
MR MOORE: We are talking of $20m. It is taking that money from productive investment to speculative investment. There is a balance to be struck between that highest priority that we all agree on and ensuring that a superannuation fund does do what a superannuation fund is intended to do, and that is to provide money for people to be able to retire on when the fund is drawn upon by its members. I think we also raise that issue of the protection of people's money when we look at that goal. So already, by allowing this to happen, we have accepted that the highest priority for this percentage of the money is not employment; the highest priority is, in fact, protecting people's retirement benefits. Therefore, Madam Speaker, it is incumbent upon us to ensure that that is done, and that is why we have that recommendation that the Bill be amended.
The second recommendation of the committee, Madam Speaker, is to put in a system whereby the expertise can be brought in to ensure that funds are invested appropriately and with the best possible results. With those few provisos, I think that it is appropriate that we support the Audit (Amendment) Bill, but I would certainly like to see that amendment in the Bill.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .