Thursday, 15 May 2025

Bills

Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025

Second reading

Debate resumed.

Alison MARCHANT (Bellarine) (14:56): It is a pleasure to rise to speak on the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. While this bill is largely administrative in its nature, it is going to ensure that ESSSuper can continue to provide that service to members that they deserve and reflect a more modern way that members interact with their super fund. The Emergency Services Superannuation Act 1986 was established specifically for emergency service workers and personnel, and these would include police officers, firefighters and ambulance workers. Because their career and their work was unique in its challenges and its risks, it was justified to tailor a superannuation scheme for them.

I have heard other contributions in this place, and I think across the house we acknowledge that our emergency service workers do an incredible job in our communities. As someone who deeply values community safety and the strength of our communities, I have immense respect for our emergency service men and women who serve in our communities, and their work is really, truly like no other. It is not only demanding in a physical capacity but courage is needed and emotional resilience. They need to make quick judgements and have an unwavering commitment to putting others first. Every day that they are met with these challenges they face some situations that many of us can probably never imagine. They rush towards danger rather than running the other way. They respond in a calm way to very traumatic events, and they do carry that weight of responsibility.

Because of this unique service to our state, we did recognise that it needed to be a tailored superannuation system and one that reflects the job but also maybe earlier retirement because they do face some of those extreme challenges, as I have outlined. The establishment of the Emergency Services Superannuation Board was not just really a bureaucratic decision. It was reflecting the respect and the responsibilities that we owe these individuals. In this place we talk a lot about legislation and bills and, like I have said, the administration of these bills, but it can be very personal. Changes that we make in this house do have a consequence or a benefit out in our communities, because every person who wears a uniform, whether it be police or fire, they have a family, they have a future and they have a story. We owe it to them to honour their service, not just with words but with structures that protect them.

Across the Bellarine recently there have been some quite dramatic events – tragic events – in our community, and these have been faced and dealt with by our emergency personnel. I just want to take the opportunity to thank them for the work that they do. Our local police across the Bellarine every day put themselves in harm’s way to protect and serve our communities, and we have deep gratitude and respect for that. We in this place as a government have made record investments in our police force, and we are funding more than 3600 new police men and women to keep Victorians safe.

The other emergency services workers that I have recently been having conversations with were our local ambulance workers. The Premier and I visited the Ocean Grove branch only recently, and it was great to see the upgrades that they have had to their station but more importantly the conversations we were having about the job that they do, how they respond to our emergencies and the compassion that they have in the most challenging circumstances. Again, we have a profound gratitude to them for their service. This bill really does talk to the men and women who serve, like I have said, in police, ambulance and fire services, and they are the backbone of our community.

This bill will make quite a few changes, and I will just highlight a couple of those. This bill will change the spouse membership following a member’s death. Under the current arrangements following a death of a member the spouse would have up to three months to apply to become a member of that scheme. We can all imagine the trauma and the grief that someone is going through when a spouse passes away, so in light of that this bill will extend the period in which a non-member spouse following a death can apply to become a member of the emergency services superannuation plan scheme up to 12 months. This really has been introduced because there has been consultation and a lot of representation stating that this change would make a real difference to families, like I have said, given the trauma and the grief that families would be going through at the time. Given that connection that many emergency services families have with the with the super fund, it is reasonable, I think, to allow 12 months for a non-member spouse to decide on whether they would like to continue or join the plan.

I have heard other contributions in this place talking to the size of the board, and we are making changes in this bill. Currently there are six members of the board nominated by the minister and six members elected by the members of various superannuation schemes, and this bill is proposing that they reduce the board size from 12 to 10. This change is being made really to ensure an optimal decision-making body and that equal representation of employee and employers on the board. Emergency services superannuation involves quite a complex benefit structure, and a dedicated board really needs to have that knowledge and tailored oversight that reflects the unique needs of those members. Managing this large public fund on behalf of members does require quite specialised duties, and the board is legally and ethically responsible for acting in the best interests of its members and beneficiaries.

When I think about superannuation and connect it to politics, my first thoughts are with our former Prime Minister Paul Keating, and I think Keating alongside Bill Kelty – and others have mentioned this today – from the union movement are widely regarded as architects of our modern superannuation system, which certainly has become a cornerstone of our retirement planning in this country. The reforms were historic in nature, particularly that economic empowerment that has been provided to working Australians, and it really was a long-term vision of building superannuation that would build a national savings pool, really, to reduce that reliance on an age pension. Labor, being the architect of this, will always protect and strengthen our workers’ superannuation because we believe that workers should have that dignified retirement.

It was interesting to read a little bit about the history, when I was doing research for this bill, and the accounts of Bill Kelty and Paul Keating in planning that superannuation. Even though they may have come from different angles or different takes, ultimately, from what I have read, they both had a position where they were trying to create economic growth. Keating would talk endlessly about needing to grow that economy pie rather than actually talking about how to divide it up.

He said:

The people we represented can’t be looked after in a low-growth economy … Yes, a lot of wealthy people are going to do well … but we also think you put your arm out to pull people up behind you.

I think this sums up our Labor values very much, particularly within the context of superannuation.

In closing, our super is a really important foundation for working Australians. It ensures that people can retire with dignity, independence and security – particularly, in the case of this bill, our emergency service workers. Labor built the Australian superannuation system from the ground up because we deeply believe that workers deserve dignity in retirement. We will remain the strongest defenders of that, because protecting our super means protecting the future of working Australians. I commend the bill to the house.

Wayne FARNHAM (Narracan) (15:06): I am pleased to rise today to talk on the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. It has been an interesting debate today. I have had quite a listen to it, as I was sitting in the chair earlier. Just to reference the member for Bellarine and her contribution – and the member for Murray Plains expressed this as well – we are grateful for superannuation and the scheme that got brought in. It was very good foresight by Paul Keating at the time in recognising that the Australian population in 1992 was only about 17 million people. He also recognised at the time that we were an ageing population. I have never spoken to Mr Keating personally, but I would assume he recognised that we would have an ageing population and then put more pressure on the pension system as we all got older, because prior to then it was pretty much the pension system if you could not look after yourself. The introduction of superannuation in 1992 was actually a step in the right direction. We all know – I was only 22 back then, jeez – it started off at about 3 per cent, and it has been gradually increasing over time. We are now sitting on an average of 12 per cent, somewhere around about there. This was by the Treasurer of the day a very, very good plan to bring in superannuation. We all benefit from it; all Victorians benefit from it.

We are talking today about this bill, but just while I am on that, it is disappointing that the Labor federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers doubled the super rate in 2023. If you have anything over the amount of $3 million, that rate has now doubled from 15 per cent to 30 per cent. But the problem is that it is not linked to anything, so $3 million today in 40 years time will still be $3 million. If you do the calculation on that, if $3 million is linked to CPI and everything else, $3 million today in 40 years time will actually be worth about $45 million. What I fear with the change that the federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers has made is that, because he has linked it to nothing, our kids are going to have to live off $3 million in 40 years time. They are not going to gain the benefit. That $3 million today, in 40 years, is not going to be worth very much. I am not an economist, but it could be worth half a million dollars. That should have been linked to go up with CPI. Then in 40 years time that would be worth roughly about $45 million. No-one would probably reach that threshold at that point in time, but I think that was a mistake by the federal Labor government to not link that, because all of a sudden if you are losing 30 per cent, in 40 years time $3 million will actually be worth only half a million and you are dropping a fair bit out of it.

But we are here today talking about this bill. It has been an interesting debate. Obviously the debate has also been around the reduction of the board members from 12 to 10. I agree with what the member for Murray Plains said earlier. An ideal board always has an odd number so you get a decision – a 9 or 11 is actually right. I think the member for Mordialloc quoted 15 – that could be paralysis by analysis with that many people – but an ideal number is an odd number.

The concern we have with this around the board members is that the members do not get to choose. There are I believe about 124,500 members in the Emergency Services and State Super scheme. That is a lot of members. They should have a choice. I think there are 6000 voting members; that is what I have heard today. They should have the choice of who they want to represent them. We have got to be very careful. We do see it from time to time when government appoint board members. Sometimes they can be people of quality – absolutely, I do not deny that; sometimes there can be that board appointment that may not be as qualified as they should be, but it is a bit of a job-for-a-mate situation. I think when you are managing a fund worth, at the moment, $37 billion you really do want your best and brightest on that board. At the end of the day, that $37 billion is the members’ money, whether they be Victoria Police, FRV or Ambulance Victoria. These are the people – I agree with everyone, and we all agree in this chamber – that really look after our communities and look after our safety. If there is an accident, they come. They are there. We should treat them with the respect they deserve, not take away their right to choose someone to be on that board. I think that is very, very important.

As I said, there is a lot of money to manage here: $37 billion is a lot. But the concern also and part of the debate today has been about the $3 billion in the 2022 commitment that this fund was going to be brought up to speed. Coming out of private business, if I did not contribute to my employees’ super fund the way I should, by legal requirement, I would be in a lot of trouble. If you do not pay your employees’ super, then you get in a lot of trouble. I will not say the other word I was going to say. This is where I am a little bit confused. How does the government get so far behind in this? That $3 billion of extra investment into that fund is, again, members’ money. This is the point we have to remember. That $3 billion, I think it was the original statement by Steve Bracks when he brought it in, was going to be topped up by 2035. In 2022 the Premier at the time said it would happen sooner, but it has now been kicked down the road. You have got to think of how much money that fund is missing out on for every year of investment that $3 billion is not there. I do not know what super funds return. I might take a guess at something like 7 per cent. I am not sure; I am not a super fund investor. I just look at my super statement every now and again and go, yes, 5 per cent, thank you.

If we work on 5 per cent and we kick that can down the road, that is $150 million a year that is not being invested back into that fund. Again, remember, it is the members’ money. This is what the government must take on board. Every time you delay it you are delaying those members. If it is 5 per cent, it is $150 million. That is a lot of money. I know there are 124,500 members, but it is their money. If we kick this can down the road now to 2035, seven years, that fund is missing out on just over a billion. I do not know if the members realise that. I do not know if the government sent out a letter to the members saying, ‘We’ve broken our promise here. We’re going to keep Steve Bracks’s promise for 2035, but this fund will miss out on a billion dollars in interest.’ It is a billion dollars in their back pocket. I think the government have been a little bit remiss on this and maybe not quite as transparent as they could have been with the members, because I am pretty sure if they put that out to the membership, the membership would say, ‘Well, sorry, we don’t want you to kick it down that far. We want this topped up now, as you promised and you said you were going to do.’

That is very, very important. I mean, our cost-of-living pressures are higher. The state government has come out and said they are going to sack 3000 public servants. The Treasurer said she is looking for those savings. Some of those public servants may want to retire; some of those public servants may be in this fund. I do not think the government should hold back on topping that fund up to where it should be. That membership should have that $3 billion. As I said, as a private business person, if I did not pay my employees their super in the time frame that is required by law, I would be in a lot of trouble with the federal government, who controls that space. I do not see why the state government should be exempt from that. Just in my final point, I really do believe the government should give the membership the right to choose their board members. I do not think they should be put there by government.

Paul HAMER (Box Hill) (15:16): I rise to make a contribution on the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. At the outset I would just like to thank the Minister for Finance and his office for bringing this important bill to the house this week.

I was just reflecting on the bills that have been presented this week, particularly this bill and the Workplace Injury Rehabilitation and Compensation Amendment Bill 2025 that was debated yesterday. While the changes are very technical in nature and in some ways might be considered quite dry, they do symbolise what Labor governments can achieve. In the workplace injury bill the whole system of workplace reform and having a no-fault compensation scheme for injured workers was a game changer introduced by the state Labor government back in the 1980s. And as the member for Narracan just referenced, the changes in superannuation were really a vision of Prime Minister Keating and Bill Kelty back in the day.

I am very glad that the member for Narracan was so glowing in his praise of that change, because in the subsequent years we have seen many members of the Liberal Party, particularly in the federal Liberal Party, have tried to oppose super and oppose increases to the superannuation guarantee almost every step of the way. Even when they have promised at elections that they would continue with the progress and the pathway to increase superannuation contributions, we have seen that once coming into power they have reneged on that promises. That really only serves to hurt the workforce who are relying on their superannuation to have a dignified retirement at the end of their working life. If those contributions are not able to be made, particularly at the early stages, that has a huge impact. Because of the compounding effect of investment, the lack of investment at an early stage in one’s career can really be to the detriment of the complete value of that superannuation later in life.

There has been plenty of research and statistics showing how much that particularly affects women, particularly those who at the early stages of their working life are working part time because they have taken more time off for children and the like. That impacts them at retirement age. It shows the importance of making sure that there is enough of a guarantee, enough of a contribution to start with, to make sure that they do have a comfortable and dignified retirement income to live off when they choose to retire.

As was mentioned at the outset, the bill itself is relatively dry and it just makes a number of amendments to the Emergency Services Superannuation Act 1986 as well as a number of changes to the State Superannuation Act 1988 and the Transport Superannuation Act 1988. It is quite an interesting history in terms of the transition that we have gone through. The schemes that are referenced in this legislation are really about the defined benefits scheme. I was reflecting on this when I was preparing for my contribution and just thinking that both of my parents worked in public sector agencies. My mum was a teacher for many years and my dad worked for a Commonwealth agency, and both of them were beneficiaries of defined benefits schemes. Because they had both worked in the system for 20, 30 years, starting in the 1960s, or the 70s in the case of my mum, that really meant that they had something to lean back on when they retired – that there was at least some form of investment and retirement income that they could rely on. But for many people, particularly from that generation, if you were not working for one of the government agencies, you just did not have that luxury, and that is exactly why it was really visionary of Prime Minister Keating and Bill Kelty to make all those changes.

On some of the specific details of the amendments, one is to give spouses 12 months to elect to become part of Emergency Services & State Super. This extends the period that is currently available, which is only three months following the death of a loved one, and I think that is going to be a really important and significant change for those who are affected. The circumstances of anyone’s death can be traumatic, and there is so much for a loved one to try and negotiate, handle and comprehend that we should not be putting the pressure on with ‘Well, you’ve only got this three-month timeframe to make that election. Do you switch over into that super to be able to get the benefit of that?’ I think giving people an additional period of time to really consider what their financial needs are going to be going forward is a really important change and one that really is a human change. It really recognises the difficulty that people go through at that time of their life.

The bill will also reduce the board composition from 12 to 10 members, with definition as to from where those members are elected, in terms of which particular fund, but it retains the equal representation of employee and employer members. I think that this is another good change, with a more efficient board structure bringing it more in line with modern governance standards. It is a way of improving the way that these boards operate and that the super continues to go into the future.

The fund that I was talking about in relation to my parents would be referred to as a closed fund now, and from 1994 there were no additional members from those sort of core public agencies – teaching staff, for example – that were on the defined benefits scheme. But obviously that is a scheme that continues to provide income returns to members who are still alive, such as my parents, but also to existing emergency services personnel, to which the defined benefits scheme is still of course open. This will continue to be an ongoing program and an ongoing fund that will help deliver those defined benefits and those defined income retirement benefits to those who have served our emergency services with such distinction.

From a policy perspective and a philosophical perspective we would all support the continuation of a robust defined benefit scheme for those who have, many times literally, put their lives on the line to service others in the community. I think that it is only right that they continue to enjoy the benefits of a defined benefit scheme. Having these structures in place that can make sure that the defined benefit scheme and this fund operate as smoothly and as efficiently as possible is something that is really strongly supported. This is an important bill. It will set us up for the future, and I commend the bill to the house.

Annabelle CLEELAND (Euroa) (15:26): I rise today to speak on the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. This bill proposes a series of changes to the Emergency Services Superannuation Scheme, better known as the ESSS, by amending the Emergency Services Superannuation Act 1986. There are seven key amendments on the table, and I will discuss a few of those. First up, the bill sets out a new rule where executive officers and contract employees contributing to the ESSS will have their superable salary capped at 90 per cent. The bill also increases how often ESSS members can adjust their contribution rate each year, which gives a bit more flexibility to contributors. It extends the time allowed for a spouse, after the death of a contributor, to apply to join the ESSPLAN scheme. That gives families a bit more breathing space in what is usually a really difficult period. The bill also reduces the size of the ESSS board from 12 members to 10, and it scraps the requirement for members of the State Superannuation Fund (SSF) to elect representatives to the ESSS board. Instead of elections, union representatives will now be appointed to represent those SSF members. Finally, the position of the deputy board member is being removed altogether.

This scheme is not small, as we have heard today. The ESSS currently manages about $37 billion in assets and nearly 125,000 members. That includes current and former employees of Victoria Police, Fire Rescue Victoria, Ambulance Victoria and the education system, along with workers from Metro Trains, Yarra Trams, Corrections Victoria, Parks Victoria and V/Line, particularly those who started before 1994. These changes, while technical, as we have heard throughout the day, will impact a huge amount of people, including how they manage their contributions and how their funds are governed.

But this conversation around superannuation also opens the door to something bigger. It raises the need to look more broadly at the financial systems Victorians are trying to navigate, particularly when it comes to land tax. Let me share some stories from real people who are trying to balance these systems and getting caught in the crossfire.

[NAMES AWAITING VERIFICATION]

Rocco from Dhurringile is one of them. He bought a property through his superannuation fund, a holiday rental in Merrijig. Anyone who knows Merrijig knows it is heavily seasonal, absolutely beautiful and close to the alpine region. Despite this, Rocco does not qualify for any of the relevant regional exemptions and is still being hit with land tax through the Victorian residential commercial tenancy framework. Because the property is tied to his super, he is not even allowed to use it himself when it is sitting vacant. This is a system that just does not get the reality of seasonal properties or of superannuation investments.

Mary Kipping from Locksley is another local who has been unfairly treated. She owns just one property, yet she is being double charged. Why? Because the system is not built to reflect real-life, honest situations like Mary’s. There is also Elizabeth Grant from Goorambat. She is facing land tax on her primary residence, her actual home. Like so many others, she is being taxed on the roof over her head – not an investment property, not a side business, but her family home, and she is not alone. This is something I am hearing more and more: people being taxed on the homes they live in and love, often while they are just trying to keep their heads above water.

Matthew Trewin from Avenel runs a farm, and he is being taxed on the house that sits on his farming property, his home, which happens to be located on land that is also used for primary production. Instead of assessing that house separately, the government lumps it in with the entire property, massively inflating his land tax bill. It is not fair and it is not practical.

Farmers like Matthew are doing it tough enough already without being hit with bureaucratic nonsense like this. And it is not just individuals. Our community organisations are getting smashed too. The Nagambie historical society is a small, volunteer-run group with just 60 members, and they sell jams and pickles to keep the doors open. Yet somehow they have received a land tax bill for $1000. When they reached out to the State Revenue Office for help they were simply told to write a letter –

Juliana Addison: My point of order, Acting Speaker, is on the relevance of jam being sold by the CWA.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Daniela De Martino): It has been a fairly wideranging debate, but I will ask the member for Euroa to come back to the bill.

Annabelle CLEELAND: When the Nagambie historical society – who do make amazing jams and pickles – reached out to the State Revenue Office they were told to write a letter. It is not good enough, not for a group preserving our shared history.

Juliana Addison: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, it seems that the member for Euroa is defying your ruling on relevance.

Brad Rowswell: On the point of order, Acting Speaker, it is clear that the Labor Party is running interference on the member for Euroa’s contribution. I respectfully suggest to members of the government that they sit, as we have sat and listened to the drivel coming out of government members, and listen to the member for Euroa’s contribution, which is a very worthy contribution.

Juliana Addison: Further on the point of order, Acting Speaker, my point of order is that it is not a race to the bottom.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Daniela De Martino): I will rule on the point of order. Again, member for Euroa, please come back to the bill.

Annabelle CLEELAND: Back to superannuation: David Russell from Ruffy is another one. He and his wife live in their one and only home, and still they are being sent land tax bills. Despite supplying proof that it is their primary residence –

Juliana Addison: On a point of order, Acting Speaker: relevance.

Annabelle CLEELAND: On the point of order, Acting Speaker, I am just referencing clause 15 in regard to individuals’ self-managed superannuation.

Juliana Addison interjected.

Annabelle CLEELAND: We are talking about superannuation and how it should best work for people.

Juliana Addison interjected.

Annabelle CLEELAND: This is through their land tax through their self-managed super fund.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Daniela De Martino): I will rule on the point of order. The member for Euroa is being relevant to the bill in discussing that particular item.

Annabelle CLEELAND: Thank you, Acting Speaker; I appreciate your support. Despite supplying proof that it is their primary residence, David has received debt collection letters. He has done everything right and he is still being treated like he is dodging tax. It is unacceptable. These are ordinary Victorians – people trying to live their lives, raise families, run farms and care for their communities – and they are being slammed with land tax bills that just do not make sense. There might be exemptions on paper, but the reality is that people are being left to fight through red tape, beg for help and jump through hoops just to get treated fairly.

Back to the bill: while the technical amendments might seem straightforward, there are real issues that cannot be ignored, particularly the changes around board representation for SSF members. The government wants to remove the ability for members to elect their own representatives to the Emergency Services Superannuation Board and instead hand that power over to unions, which will nominate someone on their behalf. The reason the government gives is that it is too difficult to find people to fill those roles. We do not buy it. There are more than 6000 SSF members who are still eligible. If we truly respect the democratic rights of members, especially when it comes to a decision about $37 billion in managed assets, we should bend over backwards to protect that democratic process and not scrap it. What is more concerning is the lack of transparency around how these unions will be selected. When asked, the government could not outline the criteria, process or safeguards. Officials were questioned in the briefing about consultation with SSF members, and they said there was none. It is not good enough, not when we are talking about people’s futures, their livelihoods and their retirement savings. There was not even an independent review; all we got was a desktop review by Treasury and some back-and-forth with ESSS. This is not how major structural changes to one of Victoria’s largest super funds should be handled. We need real consultation, clear evidence and transparent processes, and none of that has been delivered.

There is no solid reason – none – for stripping SSF members of their right to elect their representatives. We need to hold the line on this. If this government genuinely believes in fairness and accountability, it should be fighting to strengthen member input, not removing it. These proposed changes to the ESSS sit within a much bigger context – a financial environment where Victorians are being taxed unfairly, ignored by bureaucracy and left to fend for themselves. The least we can do is protect their rights to have a say in how their hard-earned money is managed. If this government will not stand up for those basic rights, we on this side of the house absolutely will, because the Allan Labor government cannot manage money, and Victorians are paying the price.

Juliana ADDISON (Wendouree) (15:35): I am delighted to be on my feet today to talk about superannuation and about a range of issues, and I am speaking in support of the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. I have been in the Speaker’s chair for much of this debate. I listened to the contribution of the opposition spokesperson, which was 30 minutes very much on topic, very much understanding the shadow portfolio role she has and going through that for 30 minutes. It was terrific to see such an on-point, relevant contribution from the member for Evelyn, and I commend her for that. I listened really hard, and she is across the issues. I want to talk about the issues as well, because they are very important.

This is about amending and improving the legislation underpinning the public sector superannuation scheme ESSSuper, as we have heard – I did not know it is called ESSSuper before this debate started; I was going to say E-triple-S super, but it is ESSSuper. We have mentioned it a number of times, but $37 billion of workers’ money is in ESSSuper – it is really, really significant – whether that is in their defined benefit or accumulation net assets. Members of ESSSuper are retired or active members of the public service, which we are eternally grateful for. They have more than 120,000 members, and these members really are essential service people in our community. Some of the greatest Victorians are ESSSuper members. They really are the best of us – it could be called the best super because it is such good people that they represent. They are our police, they are our firefighters, they are our paramedics, our government school teachers and staff. Members of ESSS include employees from state and Commonwealth agencies, including from Metro Trains, Yarra Trams, Parks Victoria, the court service and V/Line, who started before 1994. ESSSuper is an agency of the Victorian Department of Treasury and Finance. I would like to thank the Minister for Finance, his ministerial office and the Department of Treasury and Finance for the work that they have put into this bill and its policies.

I also note department stakeholder consultation has occurred with our emergency services unions. I am proud to be a union member. I am a member of the Independent Education Union as well as the Australian Services Union. I think I am the only person who was an elected member of the Australian Workers Union, and I could not be prouder of having been an elected union official in my career. It was one of the greatest honours – it is up there with being elected to this place. Being elected by the members you represent, them saying that they want you – because that is what democratic unions do, right? They give members who pay their wages, who are the lifeblood of the union – they choose who represents them, and I am really proud to say that I was an elected union official for steelworkers. That is something that I wear as a badge of honour. This idea that unions are not democratic is not true, and the idea that unions do not work in the best interests of their members every single day is not true either. When we are talking about representation on boards, unions are going to be putting people up who are in the best interests of their members’ money, because it is their jobs. When I was a union official I fought every day for my members, and now as a proud rank-and-file member of the ASU and the IEU, I expect the exact same thing from my elected officials.

I really do want to talk a lot about super because that is what this is about. We have talked a lot about unions today, and I thought that I really wanted to put my 5 cents in about why I think unions are really important.

We have also consulted with employers and ESSSuper on the 90 per cent superable salary policy, with ESSSuper leading further consultation for other policies within this bill. Thank you to everyone who has been involved in this process for your contributions in shaping these improvements.

We all know how important super is, particularly as you get older, and it has become much more significant. I must admit, my interest in my super balance has increased since my milestone birthday. I have got my AustralianSuper app on my phone, which I might check daily – which is probably not very good, given the ups and downs since Trump’s tariff stuff. It has certainly turned me a bit grey recently. But it is our Labor government that stands with workers, and this includes supporting mechanisms that lead them to have a financially secure post-work life and ensure that they have a comfortable retirement. Australian workers deserve that; they deserve dignity in retirement. I am super proud that super is a Labor initiative – super proud of super. It was Paul Keating, my beloved PJK, who introduced compulsory superannuation. He introduced the superannuation guarantee charge, ensuring employers contributed to their employees’ retirement savings, and it was the Keating Labor government that also passed legislation to support the new system in 1992.

I am a great beneficiary of that. I was in year 12 in 1992. I turned 18 in 1992. I am just bragging now, Steve McGhie. Whilst I welcome the contributions from the member for Murray Plains and also the member for Narracan about how great they think it is, let me just remind people that the Liberal and National parties opposed the creation of super – I may have only been 18, but I remember it – and they have opposed every increase in compulsory superannuation contribution legislation by Labor governments – every single one. I am really glad we have had a road-to-Damascus moment from the member for Murray Plains. That lifts me up; it is just great – old dog, new tricks. ‘Superannuation is fantastic’ – well done, I am glad you are on board. But let me be really, really clear that the Liberal–Nationals have opposed this at every opportunity, and we remember. We have long memories. You think we do not remember, but we remember. That is why we will always defend super, and workers know that we are on their side.

ESSSuper is the trading name for Emergency Services and State Super, a Victorian government agency for various public employees who have provided essential services to the Victorian community. The fund that ESSSuper administers includes defined benefits, which provide members with security into their retirement. The bill today makes largely administrative changes to the act governing ESSSuper to ensure that it can continue to best serve its members and remain responsive to their needs. The proposed changes include formalising the current 90 per cent superable salary policy for executive officers, improving time limits for contribution rate changes and for widowed spouses becoming members and efficiency alterations to the make-up of the governing board. These changes would be enacted through amendments to the Emergency Services Superannuation Act 1986 as well as the State Superannuation Act 1988 and the Transport Superannuation Act 1988, all acts that came into effect before the national legislation. That says a lot about us as well. Under the Cain Labor government that is what we were doing – we were thinking about workers retirements and their security way back then, even before we had the national legislation introduced by Prime Minister Keating.

I will just go through a few other things about what is going on, but I really would love some more time, because there is so much to talk about and things that I am so passionate about. Prior to June 2022 an informal policy recognised 70 per cent of an emergency services executive officer’s total remuneration package as being their superable salary. However, since mid-2022 such employees have been able to voluntarily increase that to 90 per cent instead. This bill seeks to formally recognise that 90 per cent superable salary for a more consistent application of policy. More precisely, under these amendments executive officer salary will be defined for superannuation purposes as the greater of either 90 per cent of the total remuneration or the non-executive salary for an employee under the enterprise agreement. This will ensure that members who transition from non-executive positions into executive roles will not be left worse off, and that is really important.

This policy will be implemented within the legislation by amending the definition of ‘salary’ in the Emergency Services Superannuation Act 1986, and the translation provisions within the bill specify that this will apply to employment contracts entered into on or after the day that these legislative changes commence. In addition to the superable salary clarifications, this bill alters two important time limits currently in place within the act. Firstly, members may currently only change their contribution rates once a year for historical administrative reasons. These rate changes also require two months notice. Given the increasing automation of relevant administrative processes, this outdated restriction will be removed for members of the ESSSuper scheme, new scheme and the Transport Superannuation Fund. When it comes to super and protecting workers’ rights, Labor is on your side always and every day, in superannuation and all other things.

Kim O’KEEFFE (Shepparton) (15:45): I rise to make a contribution to the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. The purpose of the bill is to amend the Emergency Services Superannuation Act 1986, the State Superannuation Act 1988 and the Transport Superannuation Act 1988 and for other purposes. Largely the bill that we are debating in the house today is about ensuring consistency in the application of superannuation policies, which is so important to Victorians; improving financial flexibility for members; supporting spouses of deceased members; and making changes to the Emergency Services Superannuation Board.

Whilst we are talking about providing more support for our emergency services, I want to acknowledge that on Tuesday, on the front steps of Parliament, we had many members of our emergency services – CFA volunteers – as well as farmers and many people from across the state who I am sure are very interested in us making sure that their superannuation is truly well in place. They also wanted to be heard and acknowledged. They turned up to this place and called on the government to stop the new emergency services and volunteers levy. This is a clear example where members of our emergency services are urging the government to listen, yet they are being totally ignored. Many of them are farmers who took time out of their busy lives to come to Parliament and try and get this government to understand the devastating impact that this tax will have on their lives. Yet yesterday in this place the Premier stood up on her feet and completely disregarded their voices, making excuses as to why this bill should go ahead. Did the Premier come out onto the steps and face those that turned up to face this Parliament and give her response?

Juliana Addison: Acting Speaker, my point of order is relevance.

Brad Rowswell: On the point of order, Acting Speaker, the member on her feet is quite clearly being consistent with the contributions of other speakers not only on the opposition side but on the government side, including member for Wendouree, who did not always speak about superannuation and the bill at hand solely but also spoke more broadly about the impacts of support for Victorians, including superannuation, which is exactly what the member opposite is currently doing.

Juliana Addison: On the point of order, Acting Speaker, having read the legislation, I do not believe farmers are covered by this superannuation.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Daniela De Martino): I will rule on the point of order. Member for Shepparton, it has been wide ranging, but I will draw you back to the bill.

Kim O’KEEFFE: Thank you, Acting Speaker, and I do think it is important that we identify the total disregard and disrespect for our CFA volunteers in this place, who have been totally ignored, and that is just wrong. However, I will come back to the bill.

While this bill contains a range of technical amendments across several acts, the bill itself is relatively small in scope. The Emergency Services Superannuation Scheme (ESSS) currently has around 124,000 members and holds over $37 billion in defined benefit accumulation net assets. Members typically work or worked for Victoria Police, Fire Rescue Victoria, Ambulance Victoria and Victorian government schools. Members who commenced their employment before 1994 may have also worked for a range of other organisations.

The most concerning aspect of the bill is the proposed removal of the democratically elected representatives of State Superannuation Fund (SSF) members of the board. The bill seeks to amend the operation and structure of the current Emergency Services Superannuation Board. The first of these changes reduces the size of the board from 12 members to 10 to improve the operational efficiency of the board. Currently the board consists of six members who are nominated by the minister and six who are elected by members of the schemes.

The government argues that it is too difficult to find people to fill these positions. Whilst the SSF pool of potential candidates may be declining, there remain more than 6000 members that can potentially perform these roles. Currently, of the three board positions reserved for SSF members, two are filled by SSF members. If the proposed amendment to reduce the composition of the board from 12 to 10 is passed, with the SSF representation reduced from three to two board positions, there will be no vacancies in respect to SSF representatives. Currently the board only has nine out of 12 members sitting. Of the six positions reserved for government appointment, it only has four members sitting, with two vacancies to be filled. The government has more vacant seats on the board than SSF members.

The amendments also run counter to the minister’s admission in their second-reading speech, where the minister stated that elected representatives help ensure:

… the Board can make decisions informed by the valuable lived experience of elected members.

The proposal to remove the power of SSF members to directly elect their representatives to the board is an affront to the democratic principle of representation. Given the board is responsible for over $37 billion in members’ assets and benefits, the highest standards of probity are required in relation to how persons will be selected to make decisions about the management of these funds.

There is also a complete lack of clarity and transparency as to how a union will become a declared union under the proposed process the bill involves. When asked during the bill briefing if there had been any consultation with SSF about the proposed changes to board representation the response from the officials was no. However, the officials indicated ESSS had undertaken some market research with members on the issue. It remains unclear what this market research consisted of. No information has been provided by the government to date as to what process will be followed or what factors will be taken into account when the minister makes their decision. In these circumstances there is no reason to move from a directly elected model to one where declared unions are able to appoint their preferred candidates. The ability to directly elect members to the board should be guarded to provide the best method of ensuring SSF interests remain respected and protected.

Another key amendment the bill seeks to make is to increase the flexibility for members to make changes to their contributions. Currently, under the Emergency Services Superannuation Act 1986, the State Superannuation Act 1988 and the Transport Superannuation Act 1988, members can only change their contribution rate once a year. The bill removes the limit on the number of times members of the ESSS’s new scheme and the transport superannuation fund can change their contribution rate each year. By amending these acts to allow more frequent changes to contribution rates, rather than just once a year, the bill will not only provide greater flexibility for members but also make it much easier for them to manage their superannuation and personal finances.

There is another important amendment that the bill makes. Following the death of member their spouse or family members currently have only three months to apply to become a member of the ESSS accumulation arrangement, the ESS plan scheme. Extending this period from three months to 12 months, recognising the emotional and financial challenges faced by many Victorians during an extremely difficult time and during their grief, is well appreciated. Most importantly, it gives spouses and their family additional time to make an informed decision about their financial futures, ensuring that they are not pressured into making a rushed decision during a time of losing a loved one. I think this is such an important change, as when a loved one passes away there are so many things that change for that person. Their life changes overnight. They do need time to grieve and to have the time to work through these types of changes.

The purposes of the bill are also to ensure a 90 per cent superable salary policy for executive officers and other contract employees who are members of the ESSS and to ensure this policy is applied consistently in the future, to assist members in managing their superannuation and personal finances while enabling more frequent contribution rate changes and to better support non-member spouses of members who died to apply to become members of the ESSS plan during a time of grief, as mentioned. In 2022 the government announced that the superable salary for new emergency services executive officers and other contract employees who are members of the ESSS defined benefit scheme would be determined as 90 per cent of their remuneration, subject to a minimum of the highest non-executive salary. The prevailing method of determining superable salary was grandfathered for existing emergency services executive officers, while providing them with the ability to opt in to the new arrangements for both past and future services. This policy was initially implemented informally by notifying employees of the new superable salary policy. The government now proposes to formalise this policy in legislation to ensure that it applies consistently to all relevant members of the ESSS. In the past the determination of superable salary was exempted for existing emergency services executive officers. Legislating this change to the act will help ensure consistency, which is crucial for fairness and transparency.

The bill before the house, though small, makes a number of amendments related to the Emergency Services Superannuation Scheme in order to ensure that it remains an effective, equitable and responsive scheme for the needs of its members and their families. On this side of the house we advocate for sustainable superannuation schemes that do not place undue financial burdens on the state’s budget, and we will continue to advocate for reforms that ensure long-term viability without compromising employee benefits. Finally, we should not be disenfranchising SSF members from their ability to vote for members of the board, especially in circumstances where there has been no consultation with them about these changes. I support the amendment put forward by the member for Evelyn to restore the provisions requiring SSF members be elected as representatives to the board to ensure members retain their right to directly elect their representatives, instead of a union appointment.

Steve McGHIE (Melton) (15:55): I rise to contribute to the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 and my role in not the bill but this superannuation scheme called Emergency Services and State Super – I know everyone was calling it ESSS or something else, but it is called E-triple-S. I was an original member of the scheme back in 1987 when it became operational. I am still a member of the scheme. Also, in my role as the secretary of the ambulance union I was a delegate to the board for many, many years. When the scheme started it was only for emergency service workers: police, fire, ambulance and SES paid officials. It was a scheme premised on 30 years of service and you would max out your defined benefit. Every employee in the ambulance service, the fire service, the police service was entitled to defined benefits in 1987.

I do have to remind the member for Hawthorn, who said that those on the opposite benches are supportive of emergency service workers, that Jeff Kennett in 1994 changed the legislation so new employees coming into the emergency services could not be in the defined benefits unless they were frontline workers. People that were working as call takers and dispatchers in the communication centre were not defined as frontline workers, yet they dealt with emergency situations every day. Those people that came into the industry after 1994 could not be in the defined benefits, which I think was damning of the government at the time. Clearly the introduction of that provision was meant to prevent the costings and the liability of government to carry those defined benefits for people who should have been defined benefit members. There are many, many people that are still working in the industry today that should have been in the defined benefits but are not in the defined benefits.

The other thing I will say in regard to the representation of State Superannuation Fund members and not being able to get anyone to nominate to be a delegate to the board is I can tell you now my experience when I was on the board was it was very difficult to get people to come forward to be representatives of their membership. I should say that that is a fact that has been put forward, and what the unions would be trying to do is make sure that those SSF members are properly represented rather than having no representation to the board. That is what unions are about – that is, representing the collective for better outcomes and in particular superannuation that is fundamental to people’s terms and conditions.

The other thing I want to clarify is that the member for Shepparton raised issues about CFA volunteers. CFA volunteers are not part of the scheme. They are not paid employees, so they cannot be in the scheme, because they do not receive a wage from the CFA and they certainly do not pay super and do not collect superannuation benefits from the CFA.

The amendments here to this bill aim to make superannuation fairer and more flexible and more supportive obviously for our emergency service superannuation scheme members and their families. As I said before, I was a delegate to the board for many, many years before I left the ambulance union in 2018. I know it says about ensuring the 90 per cent superable salary policy is applied consistently – I was part of the negotiations around the 90 per cent superable salary policy, because previously the executive members of the emergency services were only entitled to 75 per cent. As I said before, the start of this scheme was premised around 30 years of maximising the benefits of defined benefits. I will give you an example. If you started in the industry at 21 or 22 and you worked for 30 years, how were you going to retire at 51 and 52? Even though the benefits were good, as time rolled on the benefits were not as good. You could not continue to contribute, and the employer stopped contributing for you once you clocked up 30 years of service. That has changed in more recent years because the employer now contributes towards the accumulation scheme, which is better for those people that have clocked up 30 years.

It will be great to see the younger workforce now hopefully stay in the emergency services for 30 years – if they can cope with it, if they are not injured by the job and if they are well supported, such as by a strong government supporting them. We have shown over many, many years that we do so. This is a fantastic scheme, and it is a scheme that will continue to grow. I know all of the workers within the emergency services love this scheme; they absolutely love it. I encourage all the new employees that come into the scheme to at least contribute 7 per cent towards their superannuation. They can do that under super sacrifice, which is a great benefit to them. Contributing the 7 per cent really means that they maximise their benefits, and it is not just the long-term superannuation outcomes, it is also the other things – if they get injured in the job, there are provisions for things like temporary pensions, permanent pensions, those sorts of things. There are death and disability benefits, which are really important. I know we hate talking about those sorts of things, but unfortunately we have seen people at a younger age either die in the job or have an accident outside of the job, or we have seen in emergency services some of our younger generation, and even some of our older generation, unfortunately take their own lives. We have seen that some families have been not only in distress because of that trauma but also in financial distress due to the employee not contributing an amount that would have delivered the benefits to those families in supporting those families. It is so important that they do that.

I do want to acknowledge the major unions that are involved in ESSS: the Police Association Victoria, the United Firefighters Union and the Victorian Ambulance Union, and prior to the Victorian Ambulance Union, Ambulance Employees Australia. I have got to say, all those other unions that are involved with SSF – I commend all of their actions, and I have seen them work closely together in regard to being on the board and the decisions made by the ESSS board. I want to acknowledge the CEO of ESSS, Robbie Campo, who is a fantastic CEO and will do a great job as the CEO of ESSS. That is really pleasant to see.

It is great to see that one of the amendments gives members more control in regard to making frequent changes to their contribution rates. I did make reference to the 7 per cent, which is important, but in the defined benefits you can range from 0 per cent up to 9 per cent, and it is pleasing to see that you can change your rate more than once a year now out of this bill. That is, again, really important for each member. That will depend on individual circumstances, which might change during the course of a year. People might think they prefer more take-home pay, but if their circumstances change, they might think at certain parts of the year that they can increase the percentage of their contributions to superannuation. I know in the ambulance enterprise bargaining agreement they can contribute their superannuation under super sacrifice. It may even be a national thing now; I do not know. But certainly under their EBA they can contribute under super sacrifice, which is great.

I referred before to the percentages and how important they are, how important the scheme is and how supportive it is of the membership. And as I have said before, if one sustains in the job physical or mental injuries, they may never be able to go back to that particular role that they had. I will use the example of a paramedic. I cannot speak for the police, I cannot speak for firefighters, but a frontline paramedic may injure their back or may have a mental health injury and may never, ever get even close to being 100 per cent back to the job. They are very limited in areas where they can go to within the ambulance service in regard to returning to work and having alternative duties. The scheme is very supportive in that way – in providing a temporary pension or a permanent pension, in supporting retraining and those sorts of things – and as I say, that is why it is such a valuable scheme, because it does look after its members. That does not mean to say it is perfect. It is not perfect; nothing is ever perfect. But they certainly try and look after their members as best they possibly can.

As I said, I have a long history with this scheme. I joined the scheme when it started back in 1987. The member for Wendouree is not here; in 1987 I was 29, I think, so there you go. So I do remember it, and it did start before what Keating and that introduced in 1992. (Time expired)

Jade BENHAM (Mildura) (16:05): I would be happy to forgo some of my time for a little bit more story time from the member for Melton about the ambulance services in the 1980s. I have got a tale or two to tell about my uncle, who was also a paramedic in the 1980s. We will get to that, though, as I contribute to the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. This has been a wideranging and lengthy debate. The bill proposes a number of changes to the governance and administration of the Emergency Services Superannuation Scheme and the State Superannuation Fund; I really have a hard time getting my mouth around that. The bill makes seven key amendments, ranging from board composition and nomination processes to adjustments to how and when contributors can make changes to their superannuation settings.

Superannuation can be quite complex, obviously. We heard the member for Euroa talk about some impositions on some self-managed super funds with regard to taxes, land tax and so forth. This bill may seem technical, but it does have real-world impacts – everything we do in this place does – particularly in regional communities like Mildura where public sector and emergency workers are essential services. Our emergency service workers are the backbone of our community. We have got many emergency services personnel in Mildura, with a Fire Rescue Victoria station, station 72. Obviously there are our vast CFA brigades throughout district 18 going right through the Mallee, which I am sure you are familiar with, Acting Speaker Lambert. There are paramedics and obviously our police. We do not have enough personnel, I might just add. I think there are around 50 current vacancies within the Mildura police district, with several stations not being able to be manned in major centres like Red Cliffs and Merbein on the periphery of Mildura, which is a real concern.

We heard the member for Melton refer to his involvement with this scheme since the 1980s. One of my uncles, who was also a paramedic through the 1980s, is one of the beneficiaries of this scheme, and he started his paramedic career in Swan Hill. It seems as though the fashion for paramedics is also starting to return. He had quite the moustache when he started, and it seems that quite a few paramedics in Mildura have brought that back, which is alarming to say the very least. He ended up working his way up to be quite high up in Ambulance Victoria, finishing his career a few years ago in Bendigo, and has since been sauntering around drinking red wine and enjoying his life, so quite the beneficiary of this scheme. However, when we are talking about the futures of paramedics and emergency services, public sector personnel like Uncle Butch, their retirement security should give peace of mind, as superannuation should give peace of mind to everyone. But again, with things like land tax and self-managed super funds being taxed to the nth degree, it is hard to find that security now.

We also have to be careful here. The bill provides a 90 per cent superable salary policy for executive officers and contract employees who are members of the Emergency Services Superannuation Scheme, and on the surface this will bring some clarity and consistency to how super is calculated for certain employees. But we need to be careful that we are not creating two tiers of retirement outcomes within the same sort of workforce, one for executives obviously and another for rank-and-file workers. In areas – in fact in most areas, but I will speak on behalf of my electorate, which is what I know best – it is not the executives who are carrying the day-to-day burdens in a crisis, it is the frontline workers, as well as the CFA volunteers, and they are not eligible for this scheme. Obviously they are volunteers; they are not paid firefighters, but again they are the backbone of regional and rural Victoria. They are the ones out there fighting the fires and soon they will also be the ones paying this emergency services volunteers tax – fair and equitable? I would think not, you would have to agree, Acting Speaker Lambert.

But they do cover massive areas across Sunraysia and the Mallee. Victoria Police members, like I have said before, respond to emergencies most of the time with very, very limited backup, if any at all. These are the people we do need to support most.

Secondly, the bill will allow contributors to the Emergency Services Superannuation Scheme to change their contribution rate more frequently, from once to twice a year, which also is a practical improvement. Life circumstances change, and in regional communities, employment is often more variable. People move between roles, having to upfill positions that they may never be permanently appointed to. We see that with Ambulance Victoria members at the moment and have done so for years. People obviously move between those roles, and they take on additional family responsibilities because of the lack of child care. These are things that need to be considered. Giving workers more flexibility is always a positive step, but these could be mitigated by some other commonsense movements in other policy areas. Of course it could be. Like I said, everything we do in here has real-world consequences on the ground.

The thing that we have heard a lot of speakers on this side of the house raise concerns about is the fact that this bill abolishes the requirement for members of the State Superannuation Fund to elect their representatives and instead proposes that board members be nominated by a union. I believe in democracy and transparency, and those should be the cornerstones of good governance, especially when we are talking about people’s super and ultimately their future. In Mildura many public servants – retired nurses, teachers, police officers and paramedics – are members of the State Superannuation Fund, and they should have a right to elect a representative to advocate for their interests. Those interests should not be quietly removed by an amendment in here. These decisions will affect the long-term financial future of these real people who have spent 30 or 40 years working for their community and contributing to a fund that they have trusted to do the right thing by them. We owe them a voice, particularly our nurses. My mother-in-law was a nurse in Victoria for 30 years and has since retired. It is also a concern for her because she does not subscribe to the union movement, which is interesting. These are the people that I tend to listen to when considering all sides because, Acting Speaker Lambert, you would know as well as I do that it does not matter how flat you make a pancake, there are always two sides, and those two sides should be listened to. That is a quote from the great Dr Phil.

Superannuation is complicated enough without changing the rules quietly from under people. There is already systemic disadvantage when it comes to retirement outcomes in regional Victoria. People have interrupted careers. Like I said, they need to take time off from their careers due to lack of child care and for other reasons. There are fewer opportunities to accrue super consistently. These are just some of those disadvantages. But we want to make sure that this bill is not just about streamlining administration. Everything we do in here should be about strengthening trust. But that is seldom the case, it seems.

While there are some practical improvements in this legislation, particularly with flexibility and compassion for contributors and their families, I do urge the government to tread very carefully when it comes to governance, because as we know, when you remove elected representation and concentrate decision-making by taking that democracy and transparency away from members, you risk undermining trust in a system that has already failed too many. We need policy that reflects how people actually live and work in the real world and in regional and rural Victoria. I know I say this until my lips bleed in this place, but that is my job.

While the intent of this bill in some cases is practical and flexible, I urge the government to ensure that regional workers like those in my community of Mildura are heard, respected and protected in the decisions that shape their future.

Luba GRIGOROVITCH (Kororoit) (16:15): It gives me great pleasure to speak to the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. At the outset I would like to thank the Minister for Finance for all the work he has done to get this bill up and into the Parliament.

A little bit of history about super in Australia: it is pretty simple – Labor supports it and the Liberals oppose it. People like Bronwyn Bishop? They speak out against super. Labor? We continue to support it. So where exactly did it come from? At the start of the 1980s decade superannuation was far from widespread and it was not transferable between employers. As a result, until the mid-1980s superannuation was generally limited to public servants and white-collar employees of large corporations. Fast forward to 1 July 1992 when Paul Keating mandated compulsory superannuation. The superannuation guarantee was introduced with a mandatory 3 per cent contribution rate, or 4 per cent for employers with an annual payroll above $1 million. Fast forward again to 1996, when total superannuation assets were estimated to have reached $245.3 billion. That illustrates that from year to year it goes from strength to strength.

Turning directly to Emergency Services and State Super (ESSSuper), it was created almost 100 years ago in recognition of the people who safeguard the safety, health and wellbeing of Victorians. Its members are those at the centre of our community, including police officers, firefighters, paramedics, teachers and support workers. Members are active or retired public servants who have provided essential services to the community. Most have worked in Victoria Police, Fire Rescue Victoria, Ambulance Victoria and Victorian government schools. Other members, however, have included employees of Commonwealth agencies and state government bodies including my very favourite Metro Trains, Yarra Trams and V/Line, as well as Corrections Victoria, Parks Victoria and Court Services Victoria – but this was only if you were employed until 1994.

As my good friend Steve McGhie, the member for Melton, said, he was proudly a former paramedics union state secretary, a job that he did incredibly well. I had the great pleasure when I was the state secretary of the Rail, Tram and Bus Union to work alongside Steve on a number of occasions. I did not realise, however, that he was also a former board member of ESSSuper, and maybe that is why it has been doing so well. The member for Melton mentioned that members of ESSSuper absolutely love this scheme and love the benefits that come with it, and I can attest to that. Having spoken to a number of Rail, Tram and Bus Union members about ESSSuper, they have all absolutely agreed that they like the scheme and they are very proud to be part of the scheme.

Labor will, as we know, always protect and strengthen workers superannuation, because it is what we do. We created the current public sector superannuation scheme, and that was to provide emergency service workers and other public sector workers in the defined benefit scheme with a financially secure retirement. This bill ensures that ESSSuper can continue to provide the services its members deserve, reflecting the modern ways members interact with a super fund. ESSSuper, as I said, is the state’s public sector superannuation scheme. It was created almost 100 years ago, and we can all be incredibly proud of it.

As no new members can join the SSF, the pool of active members is diminishing as more and more members retire. It is estimated that by 2035 about 92 per cent of the SSF membership will be pensioners. Prior to 1995 the state of Victoria adopted a pay-as-you-go approach to funding the State Superannuation Fund. This means benefits were only funded as they became payable, not as they accrued, which resulted in a significant unfunded superannuation liability. In 2000 the Bracks Labor government committed to fully fund the liabilities of the SSF by 2035. This is being achieved by way of annual top-up payments that are made under section 90(2) of the State Superannuation Act 1988. The Allan Labor government continues to make progress on this commitment, and we are on track to fully fund the state’s unfunded superannuation liability by the year 2035.

The superable salary provides the basis for determining both defined benefit superannuation contribution and benefits paid to members. In 2022 the superable salary policy was updated for new emergency services executive officers and other contract employees who are members of the emergency services defined benefit scheme. While the policy was initially implemented informally by notifying employers of the new superable salary policy, it is now proposed to enshrine this policy in legislation to ensure that it is applied consistently in the future.

Members of the emergency services defined benefit scheme, the new scheme and the Transport Superannuation Fund can only change their contribution rates once a year. This limit was most likely imposed because the administration of such changes was resource intensive as well as being time consuming. However, with modern technology, this practice is out of step with the way that most people can engage with their financial services providers. Given the automation of most scheme administration processes, removing the current limit will allow members to better manage their superannuation and personal finances. Importantly, this amendment will assist members experiencing financial hardship by allowing them to reduce their contribution rate as they need to.

Currently spouses only have three months following the death of their loved one to elect to become a member of the ESSSuper accumulation plan or ESSPLAN. Extending the period is considerate of the impact of bereavement on members’ families and is an acknowledgement that during this three-month period loved ones will most likely have other things on their mind.

Under the Emergency Services Superannuation Act, the Emergency Services Superannuation Board consists of 12 members appointed by the Governor in Council. Six board members are nominated by the Minister for Finance and six are directly elected by members of the scheme – member elects – just like the member for Melton Steve McGhie. Three member elects are elected by members of the emergency services defined benefit scheme, with one member elect for each of the emergency services organisations – this being our paramedics, our firefighters and our police.

I know that the member for Mildura touched on governance. I come from a union background, as many in this place do. I must say that unions are incredibly democratic places where we genuinely do take on board the thoughts and rights of each and every individual. Having direct elections to various boards such as this scheme is something that I believe needs to remain, needs to stay in place. The remaining three member elects are elected by members of the former State Superannuation Fund. The bill proposes to reduce the size of the board from 12 to 10 by reducing both the number of SSF member elects and the government-nominated members by one each. This will mean that the SSF will reduce from three to two members and employer representation will reduce from six to five members. This will ensure equal representation of employee and employer members is retained and therefore good governance is achieved.

Just moving on through the various notes I have got here, I want to say again that the Minister for Finance has really gone above and beyond in this bill. The bill ensures that the governance of the board is fantastic and there is better customer service and a better customer service experience. It means that people that are the beneficiaries of this scheme, like the member for Melton Steve McGhie, will ultimately end up best placed when they choose to retire and cash in with their superannuation scheme. The ESSSuper proposal is to ensure that those who dedicate themselves to protecting the health and wellbeing of Victorians can enjoy the comfort of retirement that they absolutely deserve. This government is supportive of that, and that is why we are making this change. I commend the legislation. I thank the Minister for Finance, and I am very pleased that the member for Melton Steve McGhie joined this scheme back in 1987.

Bronwyn HALFPENNY (Thomastown) (16:24): The problem with being lower down on the speaking list is that much of what you were going to say has already been said. It was said very well by the member on this side just before me, but I will hopefully add a few other fun facts as we go along, talking in the same vein, which would make sense because we on this side of the house are very supportive of superannuation. We are very proud as members of the Labor Party to have been part of the party that introduced fair and equitable industry superannuation back in the 1990s, under, I think, the Hawke and Keating governments.

As I am saying, I want to speak in favour of the legislation, the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. The amendments this bill provides are not earth-shattering and huge, but they certainly are very important and do have a great effect on those that are affected by some of the changes – for example, in particular the spouse of an emergency services worker who passes away and their ability to nominate into the fund. These are small changes in the scheme of things, but they do have a big impact on those that are affected by them.

As I was saying, it is no surprise to anyone that it was a Labor government that have been very instrumental and are the ones that introduced industry super as a key financial instrument. It not only invests in a person’s retirement to fund a retirement, but industry superannuation also invests in the broader Australian economy, because the funds are used – for example, there are a number of projects around housing that super funds are involved in or interested in. There is a social aspect to the work that they are doing, because while, yes, their fundamental and first responsibility is to provide and invest in such a way so as to provide good retirements for their members, funds also look at the bigger picture in terms of Australian society and what is required in terms of investments in infrastructure and other things like that.

It is interesting to know that Australia as a country actually has the 55th-largest population in the world. Obviously there are some much bigger ones than Australia, but this is the case, and yet we are fourth in the world’s largest pools of retirement savings. That just shows how important and how influential way back in the 1980s the Labor government was in terms of introducing and investing in superannuation. That was at a time when really superannuation funds were company-run funds, and most of those working people never got a look-in. They might have stayed there five years or spent 10 years in a job, but actually you had to have been there 20 years and have retired before you would get one cent out of that fund. It meant that people worked for many years and were forced to stay at a job that they perhaps would otherwise want to leave just in order to safeguard their retirement, or the other thing of course is it meant they left with nothing and were relying on only the government age pension. One of the important aspects of having this equitable universal, if you like, superannuation through the superannuation guarantee is to ensure that everybody has access to superannuation and, as time goes on, a good retirement income and therefore there is less reliance on government pensions. This is a much more sustainable model, but also over time and as that super guarantee increases, the expectation is the retirement income of all Australians will be better and bigger into the future.

There have been a few ups and downs, and, sadly, even now, 40 years since the introduction of industry superannuation schemes, in many cases people retiring do not have enough in those funds in their accounts in order to have the retirement income and lifestyle that they really do deserve. One of the reasons for this – the main reason – is because of Liberal attacks on the superannuation scheme, industry super, as it has gone along. For example – there are many cases – the idea was that there were incremental increases from maybe 6 per cent to 8 per cent, 10 per cent and 12 per cent going onwards. During the Howard years those incremental increases were frozen, so it did not go up. Of course more recently we did not know really where things were going, whether there were going to be freezes of, increases to or cuts to the superannuation guarantee increase to 12.5 per cent.

In the recent election Liberals were coming out with things like that young people were raiding their superannuation to provide deposits for homes. They could maybe lose that home and then they will have lost all their super and into the future their retirement income will be much, much less. In the Thomastown electorate I meet many, many people that have now retired and are on government pensions, and honestly, their lives are not great ones. They cannot go out for dinners and travel and do all those things that one might hope you can do when you retire. That is why the superannuation guarantee is so important.

I bring us back to the Emergency Services Superannuation Scheme that we are talking about in this legislation and the changes that we are making. This is a different scheme to the industry funds and the superannuation guarantee. It is a defined benefit scheme, which means that, rather than your retirement income being based on the investments over the life of your account, it is determined by a formula that looks at things like your age, how long you have been in the service of that employer – in this case the state – and what your pre-retirement income was. It is normally a formula calculated to provide quite a good income into retirement.

One of the reasons why these funds did come about and exist is that emergency service workers have difficult jobs. They are on the frontline, and whether they are police, paramedics or firefighters, they have difficult jobs which often create other issues. I was involved in the Fiskville CFA training centre inquiry around exposure to all those terrible hazardous chemicals that create and cause all sorts of cancers. These are the things that our emergency services workers face pretty well every day. It is good to have a fund that will provide.

I have probably been waffling too long, because the time is going. One of the changes relates to if an emergency services worker who is a member of the fund passes away. Under the fund their spouse is able to opt to become a member of that fund so the generation of the retirement funds later down the track will still apply for that family, because the family will still be there and they will still need income for retirement. In the current circumstances the spouse must nominate within six months whether they are going to do that. Again, this is showing the compassion of the Allan Labor government with their listening and understanding and trying to work their way through things, because obviously it has been shown that this is not quite long enough. When families are grieving the loss of their loved one sometimes they miss that deadline and therefore that option is cut off to them. With this legislation we are looking at changing that cut-off from six months to 12 months

There is also, as has been said, a reduction in the board composition from 12 to 10 members. There is also the provision of a union-based model for the nomination process. Pretty well all the members in emergency services are in unions, and it makes sense to have their trade union, who they have elected, to be part of the nomination process and involved in the board to act in their best interests. In conclusion, I support this bill.

Anthony CIANFLONE (Pascoe Vale) (16:34): I rise, following the member for Thomastown’s very comprehensive contribution, to also support the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. As we know, and as I touched on yesterday, we on this side of the house as part of a Labor government and as part of the labour movement – whether at the federal or state level – have always been in the corner of workers, working families and those that seek to aspire but not be left behind, as the Prime Minister so frequently says. Regardless of one’s age or background or circumstances or income, everyone across Australia and indeed Victoria deserves that right to aspire and be supported. That is why we have continued to support many measures since the very beginning of the great labour movement and Labor political party and to support workers, whether through ongoing advocacy for the minimum wage; regular wage increase advocacy; Medicare; the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme; paid parental leave; the NDIS, national disability insurance scheme; or the higher education contribution scheme that let so many people from our generation in particular access university for the first time.

At a state level we have WorkCover – which we were just talking about yesterday – the Transport Accident Commission, free TAFE, free kinder, the Education State, free school breakfasts programs, free glasses and dental programs in schools and so much more. When combined it has always been the Labor side of politics that has been there to make sure every part of our community has the access to succeed and aspire.

When it comes to retirement it has been the Labor movement and Labor governments that have driven, protected, preserved and solidified the importance of the superannuation system in this country and this state. The superannuation industry is very much the cornerstone of retirement planning in Australia, but it certainly was not always the case. Having grown from what was a niche retirement tool in its infancy, it has now evolved into a universal retirement savings tool for Australian workers. Before superannuation became widespread and legislated, most Australians did not have a formal way to save for retirement. As set out by Nick Nicolaides on the history of superannuation, a great analysis from 24 October 2018:

The idea of stopping work at a certain age wasn’t something many people planned for. They typically worked as long as they could, and when that was no longer possible, they often relied on family or personal savings to get by.

In 1908, the Australian government introduced the Age Pension to provide support for those unable to work due to old age. But the pension had strict eligibility criteria, including income and residency requirements. Retirement remained unpredictable for most, with few people having a structured plan for financial security in their later years.

At that time, pensions were primarily reserved for government employees. In fact, the first superannuation fund in Australia was created in 1862 for public servants in Victoria. But for the rest of the population, there was little to no formal support for retirement, and personal savings were often inadequate.

Beginning as a benefit for government workers, it slowly spread to the private sector, with the Bank of New South Wales, now Westpac, setting up the first superannuation fund for private employees in 1915. Up until the early 1980s, superannuation still was far from widespread and was not transferable between employers. As a result, until around the mid-1980s superannuation was generally limited to public servants and white-collar employees of large corporations. By 1987, superannuation assets across Australia were estimated to be worth around $41 billion, with 32 per cent of private sector employees covered. However, it was following the historic 1986 national wage case guidelines that contributions started to be added to some industrial awards, which significantly increased coverage to 68 per cent of the private sector by 1991.

As set out by Helen Hodgson in her Conversation article of 2017, the superannuation guarantee came into force from 1 July 1992. Of course it was thanks to the Paul Keating Labor government, which introduced this measure, which the Liberals at the time federally fought tooth and nail against. I should acknowledge the role of Bill Kelty at the time, the secretary of the ACTU, and just what a momentous reform and legacy that piece of legislation continues to provide us to this day. Award superannuation has been built on since 1987 as part of the ACTU’s agreement to trade off wage increases for an occupational superannuation scheme, and industrial awards required employers to contribute 3 per cent of wages for a worker paid under the award to superannuation, instead of them receiving that money in their pay packet. The guarantee was announced in 1991. It required employers at the time to contribute to superannuation for all workers earning more than $450 per month. The guarantee as legislated was 3 per cent, or 4 per cent if payroll exceeded $1 million, increasing to 9 per cent by the year 2002. The superannuation guarantee came into force in July 1992.

Once it became mandatory, superannuation assets at that time then grew to $148 billion, with the mandatory super rate gradually increasing over time to 9 per cent by 2002, 9.5 per cent by 2014 and 11.5 per cent as of July 2024. It is scheduled to increase to 12 per cent by July 2025. The principle of superannuation is that very straightforward principle that it is the preferred investment to support retirees and reduce reliance on the age pension and federal government taxpayer dollars. From its infancy the Australian superannuation system was heralded and still is heralded as one of the world’s leading schemes, with the World Bank endorsing Australia’s three-pillar system of compulsory superannuation, the age pension and voluntary retirement savings as world’s best practice for the provision of retirement income. Fast forward to today, according to KPMG’s Super Insights 2024 report, and Australia’s superannuation pool of funds and assets had grown to over $3.5 trillion as of June 2023.

That is a world away from the early 1980s, when it was around $40 billion. Some of Australia’s largest funds, many of which are industry super funds, proudly representing the interests of workers include AustralianSuper, managing around $300 billion of funds; Australian Retirement Trust, with $255 billion; and Aware Super, with $161 billion, amongst others. The average balance at the moment for members has increased from $90,783 in 2022 to just over $97,000 in 2023. According to the analysis from the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia the average super balance needed at age 67 for a comfortable and secure retirement is $690,000 for a couple and $595,000 for a single person. However, as we also know, there is still a lot more work to do, which is why we are putting this bill forward today, but also in respect of the superannuation gender gap, which continues to exist. On average women have about $15,000 less than a male counterpart account.

It has always been, as I said, the labour movement that has continued to support, fight for and protect superannuation in this country against the best efforts of the Liberal–National parties that have always fought against it and always fought to undermine it. As set out by a good colleague Andrew Leigh at the federal level on 22 August, superannuation was introduced by Labor in the 1990s, and the Liberals opposed it and fought it then. People like Bronwyn Bishop continue to speak out against it. John Howard went to the 1996 election promising to continue with a schedule of rate increases, but then he froze it. Tony Abbott went to the 2013 election promising to increase the superannuation contribution but broke his promise and did not continue with those scheduled increases. Prime Minister Scott Morrison went to the 2019 election saying he planned to continue at the time the legislated pattern of super increases, yet his right-wing backbench agitated for those reforms to be dumped. And do not forget during COVID-19 it was Prime Minister Scott Morrison who provided that access for young people and others to their super, which generations of young people will feel the consequences of in years to come.

At the most recent election, Peter Dutton’s Liberal Party took a policy to the community for young people to raid their super for up to $50,000 in order to buy a property, which would make property more expensive by creating massive inflationary impacts, make young people poorer in retirement because they would miss out on those decades of compounded interest that they would benefit from in retirement and also increase the burden on taxpayers, member for Eildon, who is at the table. It would have increased the burden on taxpayers to pay for more age pension rather than less, which is the whole intention of super – to support people in retirement.

That is also why this bill is before us, because we know, particularly for our essential emergency services workers in this state – they particularly do an incredible job to keep us all safe – we need to make sure we continue to modernise and improve the existing super scheme. The Cain Labor government in this Parliament were the ones who, way back in 1986, established the Emergency Services Superannuation Act 1986, which was designed to establish that Emergency Services Superannuation Board and scheme to provide and oversee superannuation benefits, investments and assets for persons employed in the emergency services. It provided the framework to support and facilitate those super funds, with oversight by the board consisting of members from Victoria Police, the Metropolitan Fire Brigade, the Country Fire Authority, the Department of Conservation, Forests and Lands at the time, Ambulance Victoria and others.

As I said, as things change we need to make sure that the acts remain contemporary. Today the fund from those early days has evolved to oversee 124,500 members, overseeing, I understand, $37 billion in defined benefits and accumulated assets. That is why this bill contains quite a number of reforms to modernise that scheme and continue supporting our hardworking emergency services workers and leaders into the future. I commend the bill.

Eden FOSTER (Mulgrave) (16:44): I am pleased to rise today in support of the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, and I thank the relevant minister for introducing this bill. I also thank my colleague the member for Pascoe Vale for his words on this bill too, with such passion for superannuation. On this side of the house you will see there is a lot of passion for superannuation. We protect super on this side of the chamber, whereas those on the other side have a disdain for superannuation. So I am proud to be part of the labour movement, and key to our movement is protecting our workers and protecting the dignity of our workers.

This bill remains true to our Labor values and continues to strengthen superannuation for our workers. More specifically, this bill protects and strengthens the rights of our emergency service workers as well as other public sector workers in the defined benefit scheme with a financially secure retirement. Our emergency workers are the best of us, and they do so much for our community. I wish to thank them for their hard work and support, and their commitment to protecting and helping our beautiful communities here in Victoria.

Moving towards the importance of this bill, dignity and workers’ protections are at its core, which is why superannuation is so important. Everyone deserves to live a comfortable and dignified life when they retire, which is what the Emergency Services Superannuation Scheme does, and we are only strengthening it with this bill. This bill is modernising the scheme, because it is important during these ever-changing times that superannuation moves accordingly.

One of the major amendments included in this bill is the 90 per cent superable salary rule for emergency services executive officers. Our emergency service workers are some of the hardest workers in this state, and their employment benefits are hard earned and well deserved. Allowances, insurances, incentives – these all should be subjected to superannuation too. Since 2022 it has been standard policy that for new emergency services executive officers and other contract employees who are members of the emergency services defined benefit scheme superable salary is determined as 90 per cent of executive and contract workers’ total remuneration package, subject to a minimum of the highest non-executive salary. Legislating this change means contract employees are included in the policy too, because if you do the work, you deserve to be paid for it, and that includes your superannuation.

These hard workers include our local paramedics and ambulance workers, who deserve a special shout-out. Within the Noble Park area we have a local ambulance branch, and the work that they do is truly life saving. This government will always back our ambos. Since 2014 we have invested more than $2 billion into ambulance services, including close to $300 million in the Ambulance Victoria development program. This program has delivered upgrades and modernisation to more than 41 ambulance branches right across the state. These modern and purpose-built spaces, with the latest equipment. provide better working conditions for our paramedics, ensuring that they can continue to deliver the best care to the great people of Victoria. This record investment in ambulance services has also meant we have more paramedics on the road, recruiting more than 2200 paramedics since we came to government and training 40 additional MICA paramedics.

I would also like to draw attention to an important element of this bill, extending the amount of time a spouse has to become a part of a member’s super plan. Sadly, for many of us who have lost someone dear to us, grieving and that time period when we have lost a loved one can be quite a difficult time. I recently lost my godmother, who was a big part of my life. Those days and months after losing someone close to you can be quite difficult, so I know that following a close family member or a loved one’s death, you are not always in a state to think about the logistics, to think about how to become a part of the ESSSuper. When spouses lose their loved ones they should not be having to think about their superannuation immediately. They should not be having to think the amount of time spouses have to select a plan. This is why we are extending it from three months to 12 months, so they have that time to grieve and time to process and time to act on this super. Widows should be able to seek advice about where their superannuation is going at a time which is suitable to them.

As a psychologist, I know that grieving is not just a three-month process. It can take longer, and it takes time, so this extension to 12 months is important for our workers’ families in the sad event that a spouse loses their partner.

I would also like to pay tribute to our hardworking police officers who keep us safe in this state and who will also benefit from this. Every day they put their own safety on the line to keep us all safe. The work they do patrolling the front line every single day does not go without notice, which is why we are backing our police officers. This government’s record investment into Victoria Police since coming into government is now at over $4.5 billion, because we want to give our police force the tools and resources they need to continue to do the great job that they do. This investment includes additional police, new and upgraded police stations right across the state and investment in new technology to ensure that Victoria Police continues to be a modern, fit for purpose organisation into the future, because we value our police. That is more than 3600 additional police funded by our government since 2014. That is also why we have been passing new legislation to assist in making Victorian Police’s lives easier, whether it be the Terrorism (Community Protection) and Control of Weapons Amendment Bill 2024 or the Bail Amendment Bill 2025. These are the real changes to the law which this government has passed which are making a real difference to Victorians.

I have also been personally visiting local Victoria Police in my area and listening to their concerns, and I would like to give them a special thankyou – to Inspector Mark Hatt, the Monash local area commander, and Inspector Cameron Prins, the Greater Dandenong local area commander, whose team will benefit greatly from this bill. They are both doing a vital job in our community. I thank them, and I thank their entire police stations for keeping our community safe in the electorate of Mulgrave and beyond.

This bill is administrative. It is not one that should have us huffing and puffing, yet we are still having to argue about it with the opposition, and it gobsmacks me. This bill continues to strengthen workers’ rights to superannuation, which is what Labor will always do. I might add, on a personal note, I remember as a little one back in the day when superannuation was not compulsory. Someone like my mum did not choose to sign up to super, and looking back on that, she regrets that, because in her older age it made it a little bit harder. Superannuation is important, and that is why we on this side of the chamber value superannuation, whereas those on the other side have a history of denigrating it, have a history of putting it down.

We saw that at the federal election. We saw that the federal coalition wanted people to dig into their super to buy their first homes, which would mean that not only would housing prices go up but retirement funds for retirees would later on go down. This is why we respect superannuation on this side of the chamber. We value it. We know that it is important. That is why we continue to make sure that there are significant changes that benefit the working, everyday person in our community, because we know superannuation is key. It is valuable. It is so important. It is the future for our retirement, and I commend this bill to the house.

Matt FREGON (Ashwood) (16:54): It is my great pleasure to rise on what would be the end of a Thursday – I have a hunch it might not be – on the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. I thank all of the colleagues for their contributions, which have outlined this bill, which is fairly technical, and I will get to some of the aspects in the time I have.

But I was thinking about the member for Malvern’s contribution earlier in the week where on another bill he referenced the Royal Commission on the Butter Industry. To take up his prompt during the course of that: to think there was corruption in the butter industry back then just makes your stomach churn.

Jess Wilson interjected.

Matt FREGON: Thank you, member for Kew. Through the Chair, I know. I am sorry.

A member interjected.

Matt FREGON: Well, you know, the act is coming along.

In the spirit of the former federal member for Melbourne Adam Bandt, I thought we are very proud of our retirement system and our superannuation system, so I will do a Google search. I googled it and I found on our wonderful Australian Treasury website an article headed ‘Towards higher retirement incomes for Australians: a history of the Australian retirement income system since Federation’. In the 4 minutes I have got left I probably will not be able to start at 1901, but I will just give you a little precis and maybe we can extend time later. Australia first brought in the aged pension system in 1908. This surprised me; I did not realise we were that forward thinking. Actually I have to give New South Wales credit because they were first. They had a system in 1900. Victoria followed in 1900, before federation. But as a country we have had that system since 1908.

That retirement system we have makes up a crucial pillar. As I think the member for Pascoe Vale rightly said, when our superannuation guarantee came in in 1992, thanks to a Labor government, it was only a year later that the World Bank endorsed Australia’s three pillar system – compulsory superannuation, the aged pension and voluntary retirement savings – as world’s best practice for the provision of retirement income. I am one of the people who probably benefited from that, given that I started my working life around that time. It is something that as a country we can be very, very proud of.

The bill that we have is making improvements to ESSSuper – and I thank member for Wendouree, who instructed us how to say it, because I would have thought it was E-S-S super as well. The aspect that I think the member for Mulgrave mentioned was about when a spouse who is in the system passes away – extending that time to become part of the system is very important. As the member for Mulgrave said, any of us who have lost a loved one in the family know, especially if it is a surprise or something that happens too early, it takes a lot of time to readjust. Not everyone is geared up to be thinking about superannuation. Not everyone has an accountant on speed dial or knows their way around these things. I think that is a very good change.

Our superannuation and our pension, these facilities that we have in our country, are things that we can all be very proud of regardless of our side of politics. I was reading earlier that Prime Minister Bruce, who was from the Nationalist Party back in 1920-odd, was a big supporter of the pension. I think regardless of what side of politics you are on, the care for our aged and infirm and those with disabilities is something that we have, I think, done pretty well, and we have led the world on many occasions.

The first proposals – member for Eureka; I am just going to educate you on the first proposals for national superannuation in Australia, care of the Treasury office. There were three government inquiries into the retirement income system. There was one in 1928, one in 1938 and one in 1976, but they all resulted in failed proposals. I mentioned the Bruce government before, and I cannot imagine it has been mentioned much in this house since then, but credit where it is due and let us all respect our prime ministers, especially our new continuing Prime Minister. It was not a bad result the other week, by the way, if you have not noticed; you might want to google that. In 1923 the Bruce government established a royal commission into the possibility of introducing a comprehensive national insurance scheme for retirement. In 1923 there was a royal commission into that. Obviously it took a long time between then and 1992 before we got to what we know now.

The SPEAKER: Order! The time set down for consideration of items on the government business program has arrived, and I am required to interrupt business. My apologies to the member for Ashwood.

Motion agreed to.

Read second time.

Third reading

Motion agreed to.

Read third time.

The SPEAKER: The bill will now be sent to the Legislative Council and their agreement requested.