Tuesday, 12 August 2025

Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Harriet Shing:

That the bill be now read a second time.

David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (14:06): I am pleased to rise and make a contribution to the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. It is a bill that seeks to make a series of changes to superannuation in this state. It provides for a 90 per cent superable salary policy for executive officers and other contract employees who are contributors to the ESS scheme. It increases the number of times contributors to the Emergency Services Superannuation Scheme can change their contribution rate each year. There is an increase in the period of time in which a spouse, following the death of a contributor, may apply to become a member. It reduces the size of the board from 12 to 10. It abolishes the requirement for State Superannuation Fund (SSF) members to be elected to sit on the ESSS board and requires board representatives of the State Superannuation Fund members to be nominated by unions, rather than elected by members of the State Superannuation Fund. It abolishes the position of deputy member of the Emergency Services Superannuation Board.

I will be quite clear here that we are not going to oppose this bill. There are a number of changes that we think are reasonable, and there are a number of changes that we think are unexceptionable. But we do oppose this concept that it should be unions appointing people to the board rather than an election approach. We are not quite sure why the government thinks it is more democratic to do that, and we think that there is every reason to believe that the government has misunderstood what those members of the ESSS would seek. There are amendments that we will circulate – and it might be appropriate to circulate those amendments now – that seek to maintain the arrangements in place, which would see an election of people to the board rather than the pure nomination of people to the board by a union. We think that this is a more democratic approach.

There has been, I should say by my colleague the Shadow Minister for Finance Bridget Vallence, considerable consultation with stakeholders, super members, council associations, the Police Association Victoria, the Australian Education Union, the Victorian Ambulance Union, the Rail, Tram and Bus Union and the Community and Public Sector Union. There were no great reservations about the bill, but we do believe that this is bad in principle. We do not believe the government has made a case as to why SSF members should no longer be directly elected as members. While the pool of candidates may be declining, there remain more than 6000 members who could potentially perform these roles, so there is a big pool to both vote and draw from. We should not be, in our view, disenfranchising members from their ability to vote for members, especially in circumstances where there has been no consultation with them about these changes.

In true form, this government goes about its business and makes a decision. It may have consulted narrowly, but it has not consulted widely. In these circumstances, we believe 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, in our view, jealously guarded and provides the best method of ensuring that the interests of the fund members are respected and indeed protected.

There are a number of points I want to make here. Obviously, the bill makes several changes. The bill deals with the ESS scheme, which was originally established for the purpose of providing super benefits for emergency services employees. As a consequence of amendments made in 2005, the State Superannuation Fund, which had been in operation since 1925, was closed and all its assets and liabilities were transferred to the ESSS. The SSF had contributing members from the Victorian public service, the teaching service and other participating agencies.

In addition, as a result of various other legislative amendments over the preceding decades, the ESSS is now responsible for administering a number of other public sector superannuation schemes, including the transport scheme, the Metropolitan Transit Authority scheme, the Melbourne Water Corporation scheme, the Port of Melbourne Authority scheme and indeed the parliamentary contributory superannuation scheme. ESSS currently has around 124,500 members and holds over $37 billion in defined benefit and accumulation net assets. Members typically work – or indeed worked – for Victoria Police, Fire Rescue Victoria, Ambulance Victoria and Victorian government schools. Members who commenced employment before 1994 may also have worked for Metro Trains, Yarra Trams, Corrections Victoria – I might add they would not have had those names at that time – Parks Victoria, court services and indeed V/Line.

This bill makes a number of changes in relation to how members can manage their superannuation contributions and, as I have already discussed, the composition of the Emergency Services Superannuation Board. The bill is not the result of an independent review or community consultation. Rather, it appears that the amendments contained in the bill are the result of internal discussion between the government and the board. We do not think this is a satisfactory way to go. The only people counted out of this discussion are the members of the fund, and we think that is not satisfactory.

There are changes to definitions of ‘salary’, there is a reduction in the size of the board. I mean, these sorts of board changes – what is actually going on here? Why are they so hell-bent on changing the board numbers? Currently there are 12 that are appointed by the Governor in Council. A board member is appointed for up to five years. The composition of the board is selected as follows: six members are nominated by the minister, six are directly elected by members of the scheme. Of the six, one is elected by Victoria Police members, one by Fire Rescue Victoria, one by Ambulance Victoria and the department of environment, land, water and planning members and three are elected by members of the SSF.

The government claims the current arrangement is consistent with Commonwealth superannuation legislation, which generally requires equal representation for employees and employers on superannuation trustee boards. However, as was noted in a recent Senate report, there has been a shift to superannuation boards consisting of more independent members to improve governance. A representative of a trade union is not considered to be an independent member. People can go and read the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 if they wish to follow that up.

Since the SSF is closed to new members, the number of active members has declined. Active SSF members now represent around 11 per cent of the total membership. The government argues that because only active SSF members can vote and be elected to the board it is difficult to source SSF members from the declining available pool. Of the three SSF board members, there are currently two members sitting on the board who both have education and teaching type backgrounds. The government has also argued the size of the board is larger than what is considered optimal. There is all of this board theory that goes around in circles about the ideal size of boards; it moves with fashion. Let us be clear: reducing it from 12 to 10 is hardly a revolutionary change, but why on earth are they so bothered by it? It reduces the SSF member elected positions and government-nominated positions by one each. The new breakdown of the board will be five members nominated by the minister and so forth. The change in composition would ensure that equal representation of employee and employer members of the board is retained. The amendment does not appear in one sense controversial – just the size. It is the removing of the democratically elected arrangements, but again, this is a distinction without a difference in the size of the board, and you have got to ask why the government is so hell-bent on this.

We have been through the numbers that are active members of the SSF, and I am just completely unpersuaded by the government’s proposal to have these appointed rather than elected. Why would you move to a less democratic model? The abolition of deputy members of the board – again, this is all strange attention to microdetail by the government, I believe, and there you are. They have pushed for this. It was earlier noted that the most concerning aspect of the bill is the proposed removal of democratically elected representatives. Although it may not directly infringe the charter of human rights, it is hardly consistent with the most democratic approach that could be adopted, so we are moving from a more democratic to a less democratic approach.

Sheena Watt: On a point of order, President – sorry to interrupt your remarks, Mr Davis. I am just having some trouble hearing you, knowing that there is some trouble with the microphones. So is it possible that we could perhaps do a quick check on the microphone such that we might be able to hear Mr Davis clearly for the remainder of his remarks? It seems to me that he has moved it so it could be a little bit clearer for the benefit of the chamber.

David DAVIS: That is the essence of my contribution. We will not oppose this bill. We will seek to amend it and maintain a democratic election process as opposed to an appointment process.

John BERGER (Southern Metropolitan) (14:19): I rise to speak on the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, which is currently before the chamber. Superannuation is one of the most important parts of Australia’s current economic system. It is what gives the workers of today the security of self-determination and what they will need in retirement. Bills like this one are especially important because they go directly to the superannuation of some of those Victorians who work in incredibly important fields. Particularly when we are writing legislation about workers in emergency services – people who work in some of the most difficult and dangerous jobs there are – it is important that we get it right and that we always look out for the interests of workers as individuals.

Before getting into the details of this bill, as I often do, I want to quickly remark on the work of the Transport Workers’ Union in superannuation. It was the honour of my life to be the secretary of the Transport Workers’ Union Victoria/Tasmania branch as well as the national president, and I am looking forward to next year, when I will become a 40-year member of my union – a union whose card I still wear every day in this place and a place that gave me and many others so much. Today let us remember and pay tribute to the fact that the union movement built, created and continues to support superannuation in this country. In the 1970s and 1980s, the Federated Storemen and Packers’ Union of Australia and so many others led the charge towards superannuation. And the Transport Workers’ Union was right there, with TWU Super, being one of the first super funds established in Australia. In March this year, TWU Super merged with Mine Super to become Team Super, the top fund for workers in the transport, energy and mining sector, those workers who build and keep Australia running. It was a privilege to sit on the board of directors of TWU Super, along with my good friend Senator Tony Sheldon from New South Wales, as well as Michael Kaine, Richard Olsen and Tim Dawson. It gave me a great opportunity to look out for workers’ collective interests in the long run.

When I started my career as a jackaroo and then later as a baggage handler, I never expected that it would lead me to sitting on the board of a big super fund. But that is the power of super, giving workers a voice in their future and a dignified retirement. I am confident Richard, Tim and Michael from the TWU, who serve as member directors on the board, will continue in that great spirit of representing transport and now energy and mining sector workers at Team Super. We are so lucky to live in a country that has a system of industrial relations that delivers for workers in both of those ways and to have a union movement that has won us that system.

Of course we all know that at the foundation of the superannuation system the Liberal Party at the time made the mistake of opposing its introduction. Liberal prime ministers and federal treasurers have sought to delay increases to super rates over the years. Today, happily, even many of my colleagues on the other side of the chamber acknowledge that universal superannuation is an important right that gives workers security in retirement and that workers and their families want to keep it that way. So it is good to see that those opposite have been willing to support some of the changes that we are proposing with this bill. All of us on this side of the chamber – and hopefully many of those on the other side of the chamber – hope that super will still be around for decades and decades to come. The true success of the system will be managed not just by the security in retirement of our generation but by the security in retirement that it can provide for succeeding generations.

This bill we are discussing today is an amendment to several existing pieces of legislation. It relates to existing superannuation rates for certain public sector employees, changes which need to be made to adjust for the changing nature of the public sector and to give greater choice and better service to members of the relevant super funds. The bill relates to the Emergency Services Superannuation Scheme, a super fund which serves emergency response workers such as firefighters, police and paramedics. ESSS also covers a number of non-emergency service public sector workers who were members of the State Superannuation Fund prior to 2005, when it was absorbed by ESSS. The changes which have been made to this bill will help support the members of this super fund, whatever their job is. The first change being made to the existing legislation is the implementation and standardisation of 90 per cent superable salary for executive officers and contract employees in law. The decision to place the superable salary of these workers at 90 per cent was made in 2022, and it was initially implemented outside of the legislation. Today we are making this change to put it into law and to ensure that it is applied consistently and fairly to all relevant workers.

Another change made in this bill is the removal of the limit on how many times a member can change their contribution rate each year. That limit is currently once every year. This places an unnecessary constraint on workers’ ability to manage their own finances how they see fit. With the financial technology that the ESSS uses today, the government has judged that any additional administrative burden this change might create would be next to negligible. We believe that giving workers more choices, more autonomy and more control over their financial life is a good thing. And it fits very well with the spirit of what superannuation has always been about. In fairness, this is not a world-changing reform, but to understand why it matters, one only has to imagine the frustration of people having to wait months, up to a year, to make a simple change to how they want to contribute to their super.

Another change designed to support families is that we are extending the period that a spouse of a member who has passed away has to apply to join an ESSSuper accumulation arrangement. This is important because the loss of a spouse is a difficult time for anybody and for some people three months might just be not enough time to manage the process of grieving, alongside the living and financial adjustments that come with it. That is why the three-month time limit is being changed to be a one-year time limit, ensuring fairness, sensitivity, respect and adequate time for family members to update and change their financial arrangements.

We are also making changes to the governance structures of the fund, reducing the size of the board from 12 to 10. Currently half the members are appointed by the minister and half are elected by the members of the fund. Three board members are elected by the emergency services members, with one being elected by members from the three emergency services: Victoria Police, Ambulance Victoria and Fire Rescue Victoria. The remaining three positions are elected by members of the old State Superannuation Fund. Since SSF stopped taking in new members 20 years ago this year, that has meant its membership has declined significantly, with only 11 per cent of its members being considered active members still making contributions. This means only 11 per cent of SSF members are eligible to vote in board of directors elections.

With so many active members, one issue in recent years has been the recruitment of candidates to sit on the board. The changes in this bill remove the requirement of the candidates to have been SSF members so that it can open the field up to a much wider range of candidates who do not have to have been SSF members since 2005. If nothing were to change, the pool of people eligible to stand in these elections would continue to shrink, leaving non-active members of the fund without proper representation on the board. This will also change the rules to the SSF appointees, with those directly nominated by unions that cover SSF members. This nomination process will be determined following a consultation process between the minister and the relevant trade unions, because the conditions of membership are different for each of the emergency workers who are members of ESSS than the former SSF members and there will be no change to the elections of the ESSS members to the board. Importantly, this change will maintain the very important 50–50 representations of employers and employees on the board of directors, ensuring the board is able to balance the various interests of the government and those of the public sector workers. I will leave my remarks at that.

Melina BATH (Eastern Victoria) (14:27): I am pleased to make some brief comments on the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 and in doing so acknowledge that, as my lead speaker Mr Davis mentioned, the Nationals, along with the Liberals, will not be opposing this bill, which is overwhelmingly perfunctory and unexciting in a sense, except for a couple of clauses in relation to board appointments. Our amendments will wind those back if accepted by the house.

It is an interesting one, because growing up on a farm, the idea of superannuation in a small dairy community did not exist. It is only in becoming a teacher and then a member of Parliament that you actually understand that people have this very important, I will say, tool or safety net about safety within retirement and retirement security. In doing so I just want to put on record my interest in our education system and about improving financial literacy across schools and throughout our secondary schools, because anywhere our young people look, and they may well end up in the essential emergency services as employees of the state, those particular people, in a variety of occupations, whether it be Fire Rescue Victoria, Victoria Police, Ambulance Victoria, Parks Victoria, Yarra Trams, Corrections Victoria or V/Line – the list goes on – may end up contributing to society and to our state in those workplaces, and all hail to them if they do. But on that pathway there, I think it is really important that the government renew a focus and put the eyes on the education system around teaching financial literacy, because in our society, as I was saying, there is so much opportunity to spend money. If you doomscroll on any device on social media, there are a plethora of ways in which to spend your money, and it is a cash driven and acquiring society where spending seems to be the trend rather than saving. I think teaching the importance about financial literacy in young Victorians is worthwhile.

Indeed a friend of mine who retired only recently worked in the government sector – he worked for the ATO, but we will not hold that against him. His whole motivation now in life is about educating young people to save, to put down their retirement security and to spend – to live life and enjoy life – but save. I think that is a really important one. It is also important for those young people to reduce debt and reduce financial stress; we know in our cost-of-living crisis at the moment the importance of doing that. So I put that on record for the government to acknowledge and double down on their efforts within our education system and TAFE sector.

Also in terms of superannuation, the other side of our population, the Victorians who are self-employed or who are sole traders, farmers, small business owners and the like, are often focused on paying down debts, paying off their asset, paying off their shop, paying off their machinery or paying off their farm. Their thoughts about that nest egg into the future are far, far away. Again, it can be quite a struggle. I note that in 1992 there came the superannuation guarantee: if you were a small business owner and you employed someone, it was introduced at that time that you actually had to provide super for your employees. I think, again, it was a very worthwhile scheme, and I think it was actually introduced by the Keating government and endorsed by all.

Just on that and on the importance of saving for a nest egg, superannuation in Victoria started off back in 1925. It was established under the State Superannuation Fund for public servants. Moving along to 1986, the Emergency Services Superannuation Scheme was created for our police, firefighters and ambulance workers et cetera, and that relates to the bill we are discussing today. In 2005 the SSF was closed to new members and its assets were transferred – the responsibility was transferred – to the Emergency Services Superannuation Scheme. Indeed that scheme serves over 124,000 members and holds more than $37 billion in assets. Certainly we hope it is well held in the context of this government.

In relation to the bill specifically, some of the concerns that we have are around the lack of democracy in terms of the State Superannuation Fund members. We want to see that removed from this bill to ensure that there is a democratically elected board rather than it being appointed by the declared unions. We have heard Mr Davis go into that in a fairly deep dive. What I am quite concerned about is, again, the direct erosion of that democratic process within this bill. It certainly goes against what the government is on the one hand saying in relation to the valued lived experience of board members by taking away the opportunity of those SSF members in regard to their voting rights. With that, in relation to the total number of members, I have said that the active pool of those SSF members is over 6000. So for the government to say that it is hard to access members for the board I find quite absurd. Also, changing the composition of the board from 12 down to 10: what is the rationale behind that? It does not seem sound. I note, from many conversations I have had with different sorts of boards over time that it is often good to have an odd number – 11 or nine – yet this government has chosen to reduce it to 10.

In summation, we are not opposing the bill. We acknowledge the strength and the importance of this sector. I know from my experience I would like to put on record my great thanks, particularly as I sit underneath an incident control centre, and there are some wonderful, wonderful people up there. Some of them are about to retire and use some of that wonderful security that they have. It is important for them to be protected. This bill is largely unexciting and we are not opposing the bill, but we certainly want to see a greater level of democracy retained and we will be moving those amendments to clause 4.

Jacinta ERMACORA (Western Victoria) (14:36): I am pleased to speak on the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. The Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 will strengthen the administration and governance of elements of Victoria’s public sector superannuation scheme. The bill will amend the Emergency Services Superannuation Act 1986 to do a number of things. It will legislate the superable salary policy for executive officers and other contract employees who are members of the Emergency Services Superannuation Scheme, the ESSS. It will increase the number of times a member can change their contribution rate per year. At the moment you can only change it once a year, and of course circumstances can change in less than a year and sometimes an effective and responsible response to that is to make changes sooner than in a 12-month period.

The bill also allows spouses, following the death of a member, a period of 12 months in which to apply to become a member of the scheme. It is currently three months. Of course anybody who has experienced a death in their family, which I have, will know that not only are those first three months a very poignant and excruciating grieving period; it is also a period that includes a lot of death administration, I suppose. You are waiting for the death certificate to arrive and you are looking at wills and estates and so on and sorting out all of that stuff, all the while grieving, and it is quite possible that something like membership of a super scheme may well be missed. So it is a very thoughtful change to make to allow a partner of someone who has died 12 months in which to apply to become a member of that scheme.

The bill reduces the size of the board from 12 to 10. As someone that has sat on many boards over a couple of decades, my experience is that too many cooks spoil the broth. It is more important to have a qualified, experienced and effective board than it is to have a very large board – quality over quantity. That is a very positive change. It removes the requirement for the State Superannuation Fund representatives on the board of the SSF members and varies their selection process such that they are nominated by unions rather than being elected by members. There is a very practical reason for this, and that is that this scheme is currently closed, so the pool of potential directors obviously is declining all the time.

The bill also abolishes the position of deputy board member, which I had never heard of before and is clearly an aberration. I understand it has only been used a couple of times. Really, if you are on a board, you should fulfil your responsibilities, you should know what your quorum is and you should be able to make sure that you can make the decisions that you are able to make in a timely manner without bringing people who are not even board directors in to replace you temporarily. So that is another really good change.

I am not intending to cover off a detailed analysis of this bill. It is a very sensible and very logical one that brings things into line so that all Victorians are reasonably getting access to good and effective superannuation rules. As this bill is debated today, I would like to just note that Labor has always protected and strengthened superannuation because every worker deserves a dignified retirement. Superannuation is one of the most important pillars of financial security in retirement. It allows people to build savings throughout their working lives so that they can enjoy a comfortable and dignified retirement without relying solely on the age pension. By contributing regularly to super, workers benefit from long-term investment growth, the power of compounding returns and concessional tax treatment.

I would further like to say that it was Paul Keating that initiated superannuation in this country. He always said that 12 per cent was the ideal figure, and it turns out that is roughly correct, for retirement. I must say that my children’s generation, millennials, are going to be the first generation of Australians who will really not need to question whether they are going to have a nest egg. Provided that they work most of their life, they will have an absolutely fantastic nest egg available to them when they retire. Certainly when I started my career, superannuation was 3.5 per cent. In my super fund my super balance does not look as good as what my kids’ is going to look like when they are my age.

The other thing that superannuation does, just before I close, is strengthen the economy – not just the economy for the country but also the balance sheet for government. When you have got the majority of Australians secure in retirement, there is less demand on the age pension and other services. So in retirement people will be able to afford the things that they need but also hopefully the things that they would like to enjoy as well. It is no wonder that Australia’s super scheme is the envy of many other governments around the world. It actually showcases how long-term strategic thinking and planning and implementation of good government policy can be incredibly powerful for all Australians. Today’s bill is a small contribution to refining that arrangement. I commend the bill to the house.

Tom McINTOSH (Eastern Victoria) (14:43): I too stand to support the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 and echo the comments of my colleague Ms Ermacora. Of course it is a Labor Party bringing reform and progressing the status of superannuation in this state, as indeed we have done around the nation, because the Labor Party is committed to ensuring the quality of life for Victorians and Australians. Superannuation is so important in that, ensuring that we have a dignified retirement for working people.

We know that the Liberal–Nationals, all the way, have kicked and screamed to try and work against superannuation, indeed as they do with so many things that make the lives of working Victorians better. But superannuation, as Ms Ermacora pointed out, has ensured that as it has been rolled out, deployed and progressed over the years, that entire generation of workers and generations going forward are going to be able to retire in dignity. They are going to be able to retire with financial security. Unfortunately, we have seen that particularly a whole lot of women who have not been participants in a workforce as superannuation has been brought in have not retired with the superannuation that current and future generations will retire with. I think that particularly we on the Labor Party side are incredibly proud of providing that equal support for all working people, no matter their gender or education level, and ensuring that everybody has that opportunity.

This legislation is about really good, commonsense changes, particularly the point around extending the period spouses have to apply to become a member of ESSSuper’s accumulation scheme after the death of their spouse, ensuring that the appropriate timeframe is there for that option to be taken up, particularly when people are in an incredibly difficult period of their life. We do not want a 90-day window, which is a blink of an eye in that situation, to be there, so it is 12 months, alongside a number of other really important changes that Ms Ermacora and other colleagues of mine have spoken to.

Superannuation, to me, when we talk about the things that improve the quality of people’s lives, whether it is housing, education, health, transport, being in a sustainable environment, is something I think we can point to as a major reform in the last couple of generations that has significantly improved the quality of our lives, not just individually but collectively as a nation. The funds that are held through our superannuation funds are something we should all be proud of. The Liberals and Nationals are probably fundamentally opposed to working people having their funds in capital markets; I think they would prefer not to see that. Indeed we have seen them attack it numerous times, whether it is through COVID, whether it is through house prices – they would rather see house prices pushed up by people being pushed to raid their superannuation funds. We know the impact year on year and what happens when you take money out of your super and what that means one, two, three decades later to that superannuation total.

I am very proud as a member of the Labor Party of everything that has been done on superannuation, and I am always proud to support any reform that makes it operate better and more fairly for workers who need to use superannuation. This legislation not only does that, but it will enshrine the 90 per cent superable salary policy for executive officers and other contract employees. This provision codifies the existing policy and will mean there is consistent application across all emergency services employers. It will reduce the size of the Emergency Services Superannuation Board from 12 to 10 members, and the amendment will bring ESSSuper’s board in line with other Victorian government boards. It is best practice from a government perspective to have smaller boards, but we are ensuring that we achieve this whilst maintaining equal employer and employee representation. In practice it will mean that government employer representation will reduce to five, emergency services employee reps will retain three and State Super Fund representation will reduce to two. This is reflective of the SSF being a closed fund with a reducing active membership. It will also remove the requirement for State Superannuation Fund representatives on the board to be active SSF members and allow the unions that represent SSF members to nominate candidates to the board. The bill will provide for the minister to determine a nomination process to allow relevant unions to nominate suitable candidates for the SFF board positions, and the process will be co-designed in consultation with unions that represent the SFF membership and will be made public through gazettal

As a number of my colleagues have made contributions on the importance and the value of this bill, I have got no doubt that other members will be looking to do so, and I will leave my contribution there.

Michael GALEA (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (14:49): I also rise to speak on an important bill today. I will share a few a few words, because I know Ms Watt is also anxious to have her say on this bill and indeed the minister is keen to do some summing-up remarks as well.

This is a very important bill today, the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. It is important because it improves the administration and governance of the state’s public sector superannuation scheme, as Mr McIntosh referred to, the ESSSuper. It is going to ensure that the scheme will be able to provide its members with the services that they expect and rightly deserve as part of any modern superannuation fund scheme. Indeed it is a very important system that we have in this country. Though it is fraying into the federal space a bit, the superannuation system plays a hugely important role in providing secure retirement savings for working Australians and indeed in keeping trade, resourcing and investment onshore as well and enabling us to grow our national wealth, and to do so in a way that is doing so in the pockets not of the rich and privileged few but in the pockets of everyday working Australians. That is why superannuation is so important and why we must do everything that we can do to reform this scheme and make it more fit for purpose and more modern for those public servants, who do work hard for the people of Victoria, so that they can get the most value from it. I will yield my time there, and I look forward to continued debate on this bill.

Sheena WATT (Northern Metropolitan) (14:50): Such is the enthusiasm of Labor members to get up and make contributions on super, I too would like to join my colleagues and talk in fierce defence of superannuation, one of the most iconic legacies of the Keating years. I am always proud to be part of a party that looks after workers and serves working people every day, and I intend to help us continue to build on the proud Labor legacy of superannuation with this bill that will strengthen the governance, efficiency and fairness of our state’s public sector superannuation schemes while protecting the dignity and security of retirement for the people who have contributed so much to our community.

But before I keep going with the limited contribution I am going to make I want to take the time to acknowledge the extraordinary service of our emergency services personnel – to shed light on our firefighters and paramedics – and our other dedicated public service sector workers, not to mention the teachers, the public transport staff and many others whose work sustains Victorians every single day. As the Parliamentary Secretary for Emergency Services, I have seen firsthand – very recently in fact, about 48 hours ago – the sacrifices these workers have made with their loved ones and what they make and contribute to our state physically, emotionally and of course also financially. They are some of the biggest and most generous donors and philanthropists anywhere in our state, those that work in emergency services, so I thank them for all that they do. Emergency services personnel endure these sufferings to help serve the people of Victoria. I have just got to say this bill is about making sure that the superannuation scheme they rely on for the dignity of their retirement is fit for purpose now and into the future.

ESSSuper, Emergency Services & State Super, is something so many of our frontline workers can rely on and a reason why they can enjoy their retirement after years of hard work and dedicated service to Victorians. This bill allows for more control for members and their families, gives more agency to those who need it, allows members to adjust their contribution rate more often and brings ESSS in line with other funds. Another big change that this bill before us creates is enabling union-representing members to nominate candidates for positions on the State Superannuation Fund board, and of course there will also be a nomination process that will allow these unions to put forward suitable candidates under the bill – a process that has been codesigned in consultation with the unions representing SSF members to ensure it reflects their needs and their perspective.

We know that change is afoot with the SSF and that the demographics are indeed changing. Former contributors to this have spoken about the average age of active members and how so many are approaching retirement and as a result the pool of active members willing and able to commit to the five-year appointment is steadily diminishing, and I am pleased to see that this bill before us will allow unions to nominate candidates. The amendment will futureproof SSF member representation and ensure that those that serve on the board reflect the interests of their membership. This is especially important for members working in the Victorian public sector, public transport and the teaching services – those who rely on the unions to represent them and safeguard their long-term superannuation interests.

I was actually most pleased to see a couple of changes in this bill: firstly, the extension of the amount of time a spouse has to apply to become a member of the ESSS accumulation scheme in the case that their partner has passed away from a period of three months to 12 months. Those first 12 weeks after your partner passes are absolutely devastating, there is no doubt about it. So to allow for the extension to 12 months so that loved ones can take the time necessary to heal and grieve without having to worry about the enormous amount of forms that a super fund will put in front of them is a welcome, welcome change. I am also happy to see that this is in fact a very fair and compassionate decision.

There is a lot in this bill that I could talk to. I am very, very much in support of it. I am mostly in support of the members and all that they do supporting the good people of our state in the times when they need it most, because regardless of market fluctuations or what is going on all around the world, working people deserve the dignity of a retirement they can trust and to have more agency and control over their own contributions. So the changes that were detailed by Mr Berger earlier, which will allow for members to change what their investments are to be much more in keeping with current modern practice, I think are ones that are very much welcome.

I know that there are some amendments that were put forward earlier, and I look forward to getting to the contributions in the committee on that. I will leave my remarks there but just say to all that take on the enormous responsibility of being stewards of working people’s retirement: thank you for what you do. I am hoping that the bill before us makes that role even more fit for purpose for a modern-day super fund serving the needs of those who put themselves in harm’s way each and every day to protect Victorians.

Jaclyn SYMES (Northern Victoria – Treasurer, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Regional Development) (14:57): I just have a few remarks on the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 in summing up. This is a bill that contains reforms that are sensible and balanced. It is about improving the operation of the schemes for the benefit of the members – improvements like giving members the right to change their contribution rates when they need to and also for widows to have the right to a longer period of time to elect to become a member of the scheme.

It is also about supporting better governance and ensuring that the State Superannuation Fund members can continue to be represented on the board. Our reforms are welcomed by members and by the relevant representative unions. They know that an ageing and declining active membership means that we have to act now or we risk the real reality of there being a lack of representation of board members on the SSF board. It is important to maintain the principle of equal representation of employees and employers on the board – I think that is something that is not in dispute. The government’s reforms mean that the unions that represent teachers, the Victorian public service and public transport workers – those unions that know the interests of their members best – will be able to nominate a suitable candidate to be considered for appointment by the Governor in Council. Candidates would of course still need to be vetted and ensure that they have the requisite skills and experience to contribute. Ultimately, as I said, it is a gig appointment. We believe that this process is a sensible solution that futureproofs the governance arrangements for the SSF directors and should be supported by all members in this place. I think we have got an amendment that argues otherwise and on that we will go into committee, is my understanding.

Motion agreed to.

Read second time.

Committed.

Committee

Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.

Clause 4 (15:00)

David DAVIS: I move:

1. Clause 4, page 4, lines 2 and 3, omit “persons nominated by declared unions” and insert “members of the Scheme elected by members of the Scheme”.

2. Clause 4, page 4, lines 7 to 29 and page 5, lines 1 to 8, omit all words and expressions on those lines.

I have explained in the second-reading debate the purpose of our amendments. Our amendments are to seek to maintain the arrangements whereby members of the board would be elected. We think it is more democratic. We think that the government’s proposal here moves to a less democratic provision, and as I am informed, the first two amendments are in fact a relevant test for the remaining amendments.

Jaclyn SYMES: At the outset, Mr Davis, of course the government supports the principles of democracy, but the amendments that we are proposing do not bring about a lack of democracy, because that would imply that there is currently an effective democratic process and that is not what is happening. The reality is that there is the ability to directly elect members at the moment, but that is past its use-by date because it is not being exercised, and if we do not change that will mean that we will end up with a lack of board positions, as is the case at the moment. We have had one that has been vacant since 2022. If the process was working, I would not disagree with your position that maintaining elections has merit, but in practice that is not fit for purpose for what is currently happening with the State Superannuation Fund, and therefore it is disadvantaging their members because they do not have an appropriate pool of people to be considered to represent their interests on the board. There are only 6262 active members left in the SSF and estimated reductions of 17 per cent each year as members increasingly retire, so without the action the Parliament would have to make changes to legislation in any event, and we think it is appropriate now, given the advice we have had, particularly with the fact that I have pointed to that we have one vacancy. As I understand it, of the two appointees that are currently on the board, one was appointed in 2007 and one was appointed in 2010, and each time it has come up for renewal there has not been interest by people wanting to put their hand up to run against the candidates and they have therefore remained on the board. Again, I thank them for their work, but at some point they probably would like to get off and know that there is a replacement, and the current system does not facilitate that.

Allowing the unions which represent SSF members to nominate members of the board is considered an efficient and appropriate means for ensuring candidates represent the views of the whole membership – active, deferred and pensioner members – and it is also in line with what happens in other states. The Commonwealth and New South Wales also use umbrella union representative bodies. The ACTU and Unions NSW respectively are also given the ability to nominate employee representatives to the board.

In summary, we would not be able to support the opposition’s amendments because they would reverse the government’s proposed governance reforms, which are really all about ensuring that the board can operate effectively for the benefit of the members.

Aiv PUGLIELLI: Just speaking on behalf of my colleagues and myself, democratic unions remain the best voice for Victorian workers and are best placed to represent their interests, even noting union membership in Australia has, sadly, fallen from the highs that we saw in previous decades. Therefore my Greens colleagues and I think it is perfectly reasonable that two board members be nominated by relevant unions who are representative of the make-up of members of the SSF. It is quite a fair balance considering, from what I understand, that five members will still be nominated by the minister, one from Victoria Police members, one from Ambulance Victoria members, one from Fire Rescue Victoria and one from Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action members. The Greens support the Superannuation Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 as is so therefore will not be supporting the Liberals amendments as proposed today.

David DAVIS: I just would say that we disagree with the government on this. We do not believe that it is impossible to find people to run for election. We think more could have been done to achieve that. But leaving that aside, I think we will just have to agree to disagree.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: The question is that Mr Davis’s amendments 1 and 2 be agreed to, which test all his remaining amendments.

Council divided on amendments:

Ayes (13): Melina Bath, Gaelle Broad, David Davis, Moira Deeming, Renee Heath, Ann-Marie Hermans, Wendy Lovell, Trung Luu, Bev McArthur, Joe McCracken, Nick McGowan, Rikkie-Lee Tyrrell, Richard Welch

Noes (21): Ryan Batchelor, John Berger, Lizzie Blandthorn, Katherine Copsey, Jacinta Ermacora, David Ettershank, Michael Galea, Anasina Gray-Barberio, Shaun Leane, David Limbrick, Sarah Mansfield, Tom McIntosh, Rachel Payne, Aiv Puglielli, Georgie Purcell, Ingrid Stitt, Jaclyn Symes, Lee Tarlamis, Sonja Terpstra, Gayle Tierney, Sheena Watt

Amendments negatived.

Clause 4 agreed to; clauses 5 to 16 agreed to.

Reported to house without amendment.

Jaclyn SYMES (Northern Victoria – Treasurer, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Regional Development) (15:19): I move:

That the report be now adopted.

Motion agreed to.

Report adopted.

Third reading

Jaclyn SYMES (Northern Victoria – Treasurer, Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for Regional Development) (15:19): I move:

That the bill be now read a third time.

Motion agreed to.

Read third time.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Pursuant to standing order 14.28, the bill will be returned to the Assembly with a message informing them that the Council have agreed to the same without amendment.