The flying gravy train?
Australia's national airline has long been known as the 'flying kangaroo', but it might be time to rename it the 'flying former parliamentarian'. Once again freedom of information laws have thrown a harsh light on the perks that MPs enjoy at the taxpayers expense. Although, in this instance, it's the lifelong perks handed to many former MPs.
'The gravy plane: 20,000 freebies,' screamed the Sydney Morning Herald in its front page exclusive. It notes that the Life Gold Pass scheme, under which some former parliamentarians get to enjoy unlimited business class travel anywhere in Australia, has cost the tax-payer $A8.3 million (almost 4 million pounds) since 2001.
Some of the beneficiaries have not sat in parliament for over 20 years. Some have used the free flights to travel, with their wives (who also get this entitlement) to some of the country's fanciest travel destinations, like Hamilton Island in Queensland where that British fella who won the Best Job in the World has just taken up residence (he might have the best job, but clearly he hasn't got the best superannuation package).
Topping the frequent flyer list is the former National Party leader and Speaker, Ian Sinclair, who has taken over 701 flights (a bill which came to $214,545 - although he repaid $11,731).
The rules were revised to limit retired politicians' air time, but more recently retired Canberra 'pollies' who do not qualify, still get 25 free trips a year - or, put another way, just about one every other week.
Historically speaking, Australian MPs are not as well off as they used to be. At Federation in 1901, parliamentarians earned $A400 a year, which was five times the average wage. Now, the base salary is $A127,060, which the Australian Financial Review reports is less than three times the average wage. Their pay has also been frozen for a year, costing backbenchers $5470.
Kevin Rudd gets $A330,356 a year, which makes him Australia's 440th most well renumerated chief executive (he's just above the person who runs the Reject Shop, oddly enough). But, 'fair shake of the sauce bottle, mate,' he does get his own plane, a harbourside residence in Sydney, a place to hang his hat in Canberra, a chauffer-driven white Holden and the occasional dinner with Hugh Jackman and Cate Blanchett.
So are Australia's politicians flying high on the hog?
PS: The Pom Influence thread is still going strong - and many of the entries, as so often happens, are more enlightening than the original blog. Talking of the cultural cross-currents between Britain and Australia, I read a nice story the other day about the British writer and comedian, Stephen Fry, who was paying a visit to Los Angeles. He found himself feeling faintly homesick when he heard the music of Rolf Harris.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~56~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Yes, one can't help thinking that there should be a limit on how long retired politicans remain eligible for this benefit.
Complain about this comment
701 flights? There are pilots who have probably made fewer flights than that...
Complain about this comment
Oh, Yes Indeed--I would Visit 'HObart' fortNIGHTLY!
Complain about this comment
As usual, when people are able to vote themselve priveledges they will. Just about the only think that both sides of politics can agree on is that politicians deserve a raise. In my opinion, politicians salaries should be determined by the average Australian wage, with a limited set of priveledges available to WORKING politicians. Ex premiers of NSW get chaffeurs, office space and a fancy pension even though it turns out they left the state in debt. Clearly I'm in the wrong profession.
Complain about this comment
In terms of global political situations, Australia is mildly over-governed, having local council, state and federal elected officials for a gross population of only 20(ish) million, but politicians' remuneration is as Nick says - not huge.
Voters get snaky though when politicians' ongoing perks remain with them long after they have left office (Bill O'Chee, anyone?), or especially when travel allowances are spent on "discovery" tours of Venice and the Greek Islands or French Riviera during Australia's winter months (and dont mention 'emergency expenses' member credit card payments on sunglasses) - whether still in office or not.
But 8.3 million in 8 yrs since 2001 against all ex-members entitled to this travel isn't a lot.
Complain about this comment
Is this just a backdoor way to subsidize Qantas?
And by the way, how many flights is "over 701"??
Complain about this comment
It is always great to point out that something is costing the tax payer x-million dollars, but you have to see this in perspective. 'The tax payer' is actually millions of tax payers, and they have provided the government with about $2.4 trillion in tax revenues over the past 8 years. The $8.3 million spent on flights for ex-MP's corresponds to around 0.0003 % of that, or an average of 6 cents per tax payer.
Complain about this comment
The fact that the benefits are only a small proportion of the overall taxes gathered doesnt mean this should be glossed over. Firstly, it shows an attitude of entitlement which worrying to see but very common in politicians (and not just australian ones) and secondly, 8.3 million is a lot of money which could have been spent on something which actually benefits the county.
Complain about this comment
Where was Australia's Fourth Estate when it's politicians were voting themselves these perks? The failure of traditional media to carry out their role in a free society as watchdog against the excesses of government may be one of the main reasons fewer and fewer people around the world see newspapers and broadcast news as relevant anymore.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS