First State Superannuation Amendment Bill 2008

Debate resumed from 16 May 2008.

Mr MIKE BAIRD (Manly) [12.13 p.m.]: I lead the debate for the Opposition on the First State Superannuation Amendment Bill 2008. I say at the outset that there are times in this House when one must take significant time to go through a bill or the State budget in forensic detail. We will do that in regard to the budget. There are other matters, such as electricity privatisation, that will take many more hours in this House to consider. In relation to this bill I am pleased to report to the House that the Opposition strongly believes it is a commonsense measure in all its parts.

The bill will enable New South Wales employees in the following groups to receive their 9 per cent superannuation payment as part of their salary rather than as a contribution to superannuation: firstly, public sector employees who earn less than $450 a month, and, secondly, public sector employees over the age of 70. The First State Superannuation Act 1992 governs superannuation arrangements for New South Wales public sector employees recruited since 1992. First State Super is the default superannuation fund for these employees. Following the last State election, polling staff suggested that their 9 per cent superannuation contribution should be paid as part of their salary instead of a small payment going to a super fund and being eroded by fees. The interesting aspect is that the Iemma Government has decided to consult on this matter. For me that is the highlight of the bill. I think it is a very positive measure. Speaking from experience, having been through university and having had a number of jobs during that time, there is nothing more disturbing than to have small amounts of money disappear into superannuation funds never to be seen again. It creates a significant burden and I think we all understand the polling staff seeking full payment for their work on polling day rather than having part of those funds disappear into a super fund.

Under Commonwealth legislation superannuation funds make contributions only for employees earning more than $450 a month. Commonwealth legislation also prevents superannuation funds from accepting employer contributions on behalf of employees over the age of 70. As a result the New South Wales Government has had a policy of paying these employees their superannuation payment as part of their salary. This bill formalises that policy under the Act. Again, we think that is sensible. The legislation aligns with Commonwealth legislation, which makes sense. It will prevent the erosion of small superannuation payments. I think the amount involved is about $30 for polling staff, but it also applies to the broader public service.

Anyone who receives less than $450 a month will be in the same position as the polling staff, but the polling staff are the main drivers of the bill. It does not make sense to lose $30 from the money earned on polling day to superannuation. The bill will reduce the administrative costs for the First State Superannuation Fund, which again makes sense. It will also ensure that public sector employees over 70 have immediate access to their full salary. We have concerns about superannuation but we will not use debate on this bill to discuss those matters. We do not want to waste the time of the House debating any issues outside the leave of this bill because we support it. We think it is common sense.

Mr MICHAEL DALEY (Maroubra—Parliamentary Secretary) [12.16 p.m.], in reply: I thank the member for Manly and members opposite for their support for this bill. I have been enjoying a bit of verbal jousting with the member for Manly of late over bills such as this. Alas it will not be the case today. The member for Manly is correct in pointing out that the Government has consulted widely on t he bill and that the measures introduced by the bill, slight and small though they may be, will make a difference to certain employees.

The bill introduces changes to the First State Superannuation Act 1992 to address concerns of some employees. The amendments in the bill are sensible and will provide better value for our public sector employees. The bill allows payment of the 9 per cent contribution amount as an additional part of salary instead of as a contribution to superannuation for two groups of employees under the Act. The first group is one-off short-term employees. The bill places a $450 ceiling on alternate payments for this group. The employer's complete before-tax salary payment, inclusive of the 9 per cent contribution amount, must be less than $450 in that month for an employee in this group.

The second group is employees aged over 70. The bill enables the Government to formalise a longstanding policy that requires public service employers to pay the 9 per cent contribution amount as an additional salary to their employees over the age of 70. The arrangement is necessary because the Commonwealth prevents superannuation funds from accepting employer superannuation contributions for these employees, except in specific circumstances. There is no salary ceiling for payments under the bill to prescribed employees in this group. Most employees under the Act will receive superannuation contributions as before. The alternate payment arrangements under the bill will apply to employees only where their employment is prescribed in the regulations. This bill is yet another example of the Iemma Government's commitment to reducing red tape. I commend the bill to the House.

Question—That this bill be now agreed to in principle—put and resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.

Bill agreed to in principle.


Bill declared passed and transmitted to the Legislative Council with a message seeking its concurrence in the bill.