From: David Hopper
[ddhopper@optusnet.com.au]
Sent: Monday, 22 July 2002 9:33
AM
To: fpa.sen@aph.gov.au
Subject: Members of Parliment
(Life Gold Pass) Bill 2002
I have some comments as a recently retired Financial Planner
(CFP) in regard to entitlements by MP's on retirement.
1. Being a MP should not entitle benefits that would be
outside the norm for the "normal" working population.
2. Just because the working hours may be difficult and
Parlimentary life short, the same can be said for many occupations and they do
not receive the benefits, in fact working in more onerous and uncertain
conditions without the benefit of the best superannuation scheme
available.
- Unless you are a public servant, where else can you get the
opportunity of a lifetime CPI indexed pension, a lump sum plus reversion to
spouse for their lifespan!! Surely this is enough expenditure by the public
purse.(CSS)
No wonder that attempts are being made to change the System,
however the PSS scheme is still better than most other schemes, further
advantaging the MP's.
3. Common sense should dictate that in retirement, if they
have business committments or other interests, they should be provided with the
same facilities used by the pensioner public and subject to the same rules for
income/assets that CentreLink work under.
Even CEO's of Public Companies in the main do not get the
facilities provided by the Gov. on retirement, they are also subject to
Asset/Income tests.
4.Asset/Income tests should be applied, regardless of term of
office.
5.Parlimentarians should NOT be allowed to set their our terms
and conditions, be the same as all other organisations
I am firmly against the idea of the Life Gold Pass facility
and ancillary benefits being awarded to MP's.
David Hopper CFP Dip FP
16 Macadam Street
Modbury Heights SA 5092.