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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 7 Hansard (29 June) . . Page.. 2280 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

Having said that, there are a few points that need to be made. The first is that it is a bit rough to look at where the money has come from but fail to look at the total figure that has been put in. The fact is that the total amount put into superannuation since we have been in office has vastly exceeded the amount put in in the equivalent period before we came to office. That is the case. Secondly, although we have not contributed to excess funding-

Mr Berry: The first term of office you put none in.

MR HUMPHRIES: That is also not quite true.

Mr Berry: You put it in emerging liabilities.

MR HUMPHRIES: I will table a table in a moment to demonstrate what the situation is. It is true no money went into the excess funding column-there were zeros in that column. But in the emerging costs column the figure is very different. What is more, it is much more generously funded in that column than it ever was under the Labor government. For example, under emerging costs you had $7.9 million or so in 1994-1995, you had $6.2 million in 1993-1994 under Labor, and you had $1.6 million in 1992-1993 under Labor. Under the Liberal Party those figured improved dramatically: $10.2 million in 1995-1996; $13.3 million in 1996-1997; $16.5 million in 1997-1998; and $20 million in 1998-1999. Dramatic improvements in emerging costs were funded by this government.

So on one column of the document that I will table we have not done as well as the previous government and on the other column we have done much better than the previous government. The bottom line of $300 million also needs to be taken into account.

Let me make another point. You have to ask where the excess funding that Labor was putting in between 1991 and 1994 came from. Where did the money come from? It came from cash reserves. Members have seen previously the figures on cash reserves under the Labor government, starting with $220 million in August 1991 down to zero in April 1995. That is where the super contributions came from. That is why under the Liberal government money was not taken from cash reserves to fund superannuation. But we now have a surplus, and the existence of a surplus is the reason today that we are able to fund that superannuation.

MR BERRY (5.07): I still recall sitting in the Estimates Committee-this was, I think, three estimates committees ago-and discovering by accident that $80 million was being taken from departments for superannuation contributions and only $40 million was going to be put into the superannuation funds. When questioned, officials said, "There's been a bit of leakage." It was more like a flood. In the end, none of the $80 million went in so it was really a dam burst.

Mr Humphries: No. None of the $80 million-

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