- Home
- Hansard & Papers
- Legislative Assembly
- 5 April 2001
State Transit Authority Chief Executive Officer Salary Package
Printing Tips |
Print selected text
| Full Day Hansard Transcript
« Prior Item |
Item 22 of 51
| Next Item »
Page: 13344
Mr O'FARRELL: My question is directed to the Minister for Transport, and Minister for Roads. How can he justify boosting the annual salary of the head of the State Transit Authority by 22 per cent to $225,000 when, according to his own annual report, the number of complaints received by State Transit jumped by nearly 19 per cent, with bus and ferry passengers complaining about late services, overcrowding and cancelled routes? Does this mean that the more complaints that are received, the more he will pay public transport bureaucrats?
Mr SCULLY: One can see the Opposition's morning tactics meeting: "What are we going to ask today? What about something from the Daily Telegraph? No, not from the Telegraph, let's try the Herald." So members opposite get the front page of the Sydney Morning Herald and say, "Let's surprise the Minister today. Let us ask him a question of which he obviously has no forewarning. Let us ask him about the pay given to the chief executive of State Transit." Well, Mr Speaker, I am happy to answer this question. As many honourable members would be aware, the chief executive's appointment came up for renewal earlier this year. An independent panel determined his pay and conditions. The panel comprised the chairman of State Transit—
Mr O'Farrell: Appointed by you.
Mr SCULLY: That is not so. It might surprise the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to know that the chairman was the incumbent in that position when I was appointed as the Minister for Transport. The panel also consists of the Director-General of the Department of Transport and the deputy Director-General of the Premier's Department. The pay of the chief executive of State Transit went from $204,000 to $225,000, which is well within salary band level 6. The panel acknowledged that Mr Stott had done a good job during the Olympic Games. Opposition members may not be aware of the role of the chief executive.
Honourable members may recall that a very big task was undertaken last year, the Olympic Games. The biggest task undertaken during the Olympic Games was transport. Opposition members talked it down. Do honourable members recall that every single day the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Barry O'Farrell, and the Leader of the Opposition were on their feet and almost begging for poor transport? They were hoping that there would be poor transport; in fact, the rumours were that they had fingers crossed, hoping that the transport system would not be equal to the task. Barry O'Farrell said something that I think he repeated today:
My gut feeling is that even though I live close to a railway station, I am catching a bus to the Olympics.
After John Stott was brought in as the State Transit Authority [STA] chief executive to assist the private bus industry to resolve a number of difficulties that were being experienced in the period leading up to the Olympic Games—and he did a sterling job—Barry O'Farrell was asked about transport performance, which included the buses and trains. He very begrudgingly, very uncomfortably, very ungraciously and almost with tears in his eyes—in fact he was known to have complained throughout the corridors of this Parliament about how disappointed he was in the performance of the transport agencies—said, "It's a gold medal performance from all the agencies involved."
Mr Stoner: Point of order: My point of order relates to relevance. The Minister is arguing and basking in the past glory of the Olympics. He is ignoring the purport of the question asked by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order.
Mr SCULLY: The point of order is quite pertinent because it shows how ignorant members of the Opposition are about the process. The Opposition has now brought in a new policy agenda. It is hard to extract policy from the Opposition.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Wakehurst to order for the third time.
Mr SCULLY: The point of order is significant because, unlike members of the Government, who not unreasonably adhere to the position that remuneration reflects past performance—
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order. I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to order for the second time.
Mr SCULLY:—members of the Opposition have now put themselves into the position of asserting that, for the purposes of determining salary and remuneration, chief executive performance will not be past performance but future performance. Instead of having a panel comprising a chairman of the board, the Director-General of the Department of Transport and deputy head of the Premier's Department, the Opposition will have star gazers, astrologers, crystal balls, tea leaves and tarot cards. They will be rolling the tea leaves around and saying, "Well, the performance is going to be great over the next year. Let's give him a good salary", or, "Let's throw the cards in the air and see what happens." What a wonderful policy mechanism! I understand that around the shadow Cabinet table that is what the Deputy Leader of the Opposition actually puts to the Leader of the Opposition. This Government has a lot of confidence in Robyn Kruk. She does a very good job as deputy Director-General of the Premier's Department.
Mrs Chikarovski: Point of order: The other day the Minister for Transport said that the performance measure he used had an analog display, and that as the level of consumer complaints about ferries was so high there would be no fare increases. The level of complaint as reflected in the annual report is increasing and he is accepting that as a measure of performance of the transport department. If it is good enough to measure the performance of the department, why is it not good enough to measure the performance of the head of the department?
Mrs Skinner: To the point of order: On past occasions, Mr Speaker, you have called people from this side to order for being noisy. I could hardly hear a point that the Leader of the Opposition made during that point of order because of the noise, particularly coming from the Premier, whilst the Leader of the Opposition was speaking. I ask you to be fair and to ask members of the Government to be quiet when members on this side are making points of order.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order.
Mr SCULLY: I have acknowledged that there are some difficulties with Sydney ferries at the moment.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will remain silent.
Mr SCULLY: The Government has taken decisive action in the past few days. It has put a freeze on fare increases for Sydney ferries until such time as their performance has improved. In January when the performance was being assessed against the previous year, which is traditionally the case, unlike this new soothsaying astrological star movement opposite towards crystal ball gazing performance assessment that the Coalition will put into effect.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will remain silent.
Mr SCULLY: I am not sure that the astrological expertise will get great consultancy from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition.
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Pittwater to order. I call the honourable member for Davidson to order.
Mr SCULLY: I want to ask Nick, "Did you ever do this sort of stuff when you were Premier?" He would probably say, "No, I don't believe we did. We actually looked at past performance when we were assessing a new contract."
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting. I place the honourable member for Baulkham Hills on two calls to order.
Mr SCULLY: In terms of the performance during the Olympics, I think they probably took that into account. This House ought to know how the former Coalition Government performed on Sydney buses compared with how we have performed. The Leader of the Opposition wandered down to Wynyard and handed out new flyers and said she was concerned about overcrowding
Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the honourable member for Wakehurst to order for the fourth time.
Mr SCULLY: The Coalition Government's strategy on overcrowding was absolutely terrific! They handled overcrowding by reducing the bus fleet by 174 buses, and cutting patronage by 8 per cent. They said to people, "We don't want you to go on our buses. You're banned, sorry." In 1988 the former Coalition Government had 1,646 buses and when it was justly defeated six years ago it had 1,472 buses. That is how they dealt with patronage and overcrowding, but it gets worse! When their performance on Sydney buses is examined Coalition members deserve a pay cut. We have 348 wheelchair accessible buses and they had none! I do not even know who is the shadow Minister for the Environment, but the Coalition says it is environmentally conscious. The former Coalition Government had just over 100 compressed natural gas buses, but we have 250 with another 154 on order. This Government is fair dinkum about environmentally friendly buses. How many buses are airconditioned?
Mr Oakeshott: How about passenger friendliness?
Mr SCULLY: Okay, passenger friendliness. They had no closed circuit television cameras on walls when they were in government but we are putting them on all walls. They had 124 airconditioned buses and we have 631. The list goes on and on. If the Opposition wants to talk about performance, I am happy to be held to account. This Government has a damn good performance in terms of Sydney buses. When the Leader of the Opposition said she is worried about overcrowding, she has to be called to account. When the Coalition was in government more than 100 buses were cut, patronage was dealt with by cutting the numbers. They did not have a sense of commitment to security and passenger comfort. This question will be dealt with in the way it deserves.
Last modified 05/12/2007 16:31:31 : Update this page