Chapter 21:       REFORM OF NEW SUPER POLLIES’ REMUNERATION IN LINE WITH COMMUNITY EXPECTATIONS.


 

MOTION: That the Rudd Government immediately legislate to award politicians elected at the 2004 Federal Election and subsequently, annual salary compensation for accumulated and ongoing losses due to the existing differential superannuation contribution system.

Rationale:

A simple survey of the populace would demonstrate to politicians that the community at large is more than disenchanted with the self-serving and grossly unfair nature of the pre-2004 Election remuneration being maintained by the major parties.

The community counts on our Pollies to be fair and to give everyone a fair go. Never-the-less, in 2007 the Remuneration Tribunal handed out a pay increase of 6.8% p.a. to all Federal Politicians, regardless of when they were elected. At the time our Pollies went into dizzy spins around the community like headless chooks, pretending that the Tribunal’s determination had been fair and independent! What utter BS! How could the Remuneration Tribunal’s determination have been fair in the absence of differentiation between pre-2004 and post-2004 Pollies’ remuneration packages? How could the singular determination of a one-size-fits-all-Pollies, have been unbiased and independently determined unless major party politically motivated, and/or political interference had occurred? Corruption is more than likely in the absence of transparency. As usual, OZ Media allowed our major parties to get away with it.

There can be only one reason that the Remuneration Tribunal failed to differentiate between the existing two tiers and consequently to compensate the latter for the difference between 69% and 15% taxpayer funded superannuation contributions. And that is, that had the commission established a legal and political precedent for doing so, then the “Old Super Pollierorts would not be able to be resurrected progressively, as secretly planned by Howard and Beazley for which bipartisan support was established. There is no other possible conclusion. The system of “Old Super Pollie superannuation would have been smashed permanently. H&C have been ideologically determined to smash the Union movement’s award based system of pay. The same must happen to politicians’ economically irrational remuneration system to allow actual democratic change to occur and a new political vision for 21C to arise.

The notion of such change is diametrically opposed to John Howard’s insistence that he “Would do nothing to trash the Liberal Party’s future”! If democratic outcomes were to actually succeed, then that would be bad luck for Dear John. Despite Howard’s ego telling him that he must now defend his record, it is clear that the Australian electorate had had enough of his lies and undemocratic government. If anything, John Howard spent a decade preparing the ground work for the people to understand the need for just such change. However, the question for the public is, “Will the Rudd Government be any different?”

The suspicion that a secret bipartisan deal to reinstate 69% super for all Pollies is exemplified as follows: The currently anomalous two-tiered system of Old Super Pollies and New Super Pollies has not resulted in substantive complaints from the latter. Why would that be so? They must have been promised rectification and compensation going forward. Can you imagine Pollies declaring that the substantial difference in remuneration packages is acceptable to them personally, because they are pure of heart and are only motivated by service to the people? To use one of MP Tony Abbott’s favourite epithets, “That, would be BS!”

To get further insight into the nature of OZ Media’s taboos and avoidance of this issue generally, check out the following video/transcript from the ABC’s Lateline program:

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2007/s2096385.htm

Not the slightest attempt was made at broaching the most important democratic subject, which must be high on the grievance list of Barnaby Joyce and all post-2004 elected politicians. Their lips have been zipped. Why? Because they’ve been promised bipartisan superannuation resurrection and compensation- what else could it be? Beazley OL and Howard PM probably conspired to retrospectively reinstate the economically irrational superannuation largesse to such Pollies, provided that they were to promise to refrain from seeking salary justice in the short-term. Despite the obvious opportunity available to Ms Sales as interviewer, clearly her terms of reference had to have been proscribed by her ABC management minders.

Correspondence with the ABC on this issue should be available on the RUGC website - in the near future hopefully.

Read the following articles for some background information and other views: The majority of politicians who favour only trivial changes to Pollies’ remuneration are truly out lunch, are truly self-serving and are oblivious to community outrage. If bipartisan democratic support for responding to “Respect for the will of the people” were anything other than lip-service at best and a monumental lie at worst then our Pollies and OZ Media would actively seek democratic change. Have a decko at the following:

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/02/11/1076388440350.html

http://www.blognow.com.au/behindthenews/65241/It_hasn039t_worked_yet.html

http://andrewbartlett.com/blog/?p=348

The BS peddled by Pollies resisting change is completely irrational spin, unjustified economically and politically self-serving – par for the course brainwashing. The obvious question to be asked is, does the Rudd Government intend to maintain the long standing anomalous Pollie remuneration package? Yes or no? The triviality of Rudd’s declaration of an 18 month salary freeze for politicians simply augments community frustration, amplifies community cynicism and is not much better than a poke in the public eye with a burnt stick. Radical change is needed Mr Rudd, not token gestures such as a status quo motivated moratorium on Pollie salary increases for 18 months. Such a proposition is not fair dinkum within the realms of “a strategy for the nation’s future”, unless more of the same Orwellian government is the strategy.

 

Click here to Return to the INDEX