Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 5 Hansard (13 May) . . Page.. 1296 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

That is the normal approach. For all ACT Public Service chief executives, their remuneration is set by the Remuneration Tribunal, as the legislation that we passed in this place says categorically. It is totally on the public record.

Ms Tucker: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was, "Is it not misleading?", because Mrs Carnell said in the media in the past week that all executive salaries are set by an independent tribunal. The question I asked was: Is it not misleading when in fact the salaries of executives of Territory-owned corporations are not so set? That was my question.

MR SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Mrs Carnell is explaining the situation.

MRS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, the point I am making is that chief executives of Territory-owned corporations are not public servants. It is quite simple, as far as I understand it. Our ACT Public Service chief executives have performance contracts with Ministers and so on and salaries are set by the Remuneration Tribunal.

I will use this opportunity to answer a tiny bit of a question that Mr Osborne asked me before. He asked me about the Secretary of Defence's salary, Mr Speaker. The Secretary of Defence's salary is, in cash, $151,430, plus $40,000 in superannuation, $16,000 for a car, $1,500 for parking, $1,700 for local travel for spouse, and $15,500 for overseas travel for spouse, which makes a total of $226,130.

MS TUCKER: I have a supplementary question, Mr Speaker. In respect of the Territory-owned corporations, as a shareholder representing the ACT taxpayers, which I understand you are, Mrs Carnell, do you not think it is appropriate, therefore, for the Government to play a role in setting the executive salaries for Territory-owned corporations?

MRS CARNELL: No, Mr Speaker, I do not. We set up our Territory-owned corporations under the TOC Act. We put in place boards that run those corporations. They have responsibilities under our legislation and under the corporations legislation. They take significant personal responsibility when taking those jobs. I think it is no more appropriate for this Assembly or, for that matter, the shareholders to intervene in setting the salary of the chief executive than I think it would be appropriate for the shareholders to become involved in the day-to-day operating decisions that are made by either the chief executive or the board. That is the reason why we have board members. It is the reason why we pay the chair of the board. If we are going to intervene in those sorts of decisions, Mr Speaker, quite seriously, we should not have the boards at all; but the fact is that this Assembly passed the legislation.

I ask that all further questions be placed on the notice paper.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .