Ashley Robinson is the master of self-deprecation. He reckons he has two sorts of luck – bad luck and no luck. As a lifetime resident of the Coast, this former publican has plenty of nostalgic memories to share. Why it pays to be a pollie
| Ashley Robinson
So the nation gets a 4% pay rise but the mob running it get 6%. That makes sense.
Of course, the argument is that they have to be available at all times, their life is like that of a goldfish, they would be paid more if they followed their professions, blah blah blah.
My argument is that no-one put a gun to their head and made them do the job and, more importantly, if they are entitled to a pay rise surely it should fall into place with the rest of us, the great unwashed.
So for roughly $4000 a week what does a backbencher do? What does the timesheet look like?
But even more annoying than the rogue 2% is how much money does a federal politician out of a major party put towards the upcoming federal election campaign to keep the healthy pay packet coming.
Add to that electoral staff all working madly on the campaign so that their boss gets re-elected and it makes the $200,000 or something pay packet seem a little insignificant in the scope of things.
“Disgraceful” would be the first word that would spring to my tiny mind.
But in defence of the average local member – whether it is a councillor, state or federal member – the job would be quite taxing, pardon the pun. From potholes to tea and scones with various committees that all believe their cause is the most important.
Some are natural leaders who deserve every cent they earn while others frankly should be paying us for the privilege.
Granted, it is a significant position to hold, no matter what level of public office. The representatives have been elected by the people of their community – apart from the ones who are strategically placed in areas by the major parties to try and win an upcoming election – to do the very best for their community.
Of course, sometimes those members that are from the major parties have to vote along the party line rather than what would be in the best interests for their community.
But it should be remembered that we put them in there and we seem to just put up with it, so I suppose we get what we deserve. But they shouldn’t be monkeys because we aren’t paying peanuts.
The whole pay issue is rather ironic when over the past few months there has been talks about putting teachers on performance-based incentives, which is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.
For a start, I bet the ones that tried to teach me would have struggled to pay the bills in their day if part of their package was reliant on making me smarter.
Let’s put our federal politicians on performance-based remuneration and see what they can deliver.
Sure, some will earn plenty while others might be breaking the bread with some of my old teachers.
Take it a step further; let’s play a bit of reality television with them. Not Big Brother where they would probably be better suited but a show which could be named Trading Places.
Professionally they could trade places with a teacher, nurse, fireman, ambulance man or policeman and see how they go on their wages under their pressure and see if it makes their job stack up to the $200,000.
I would draw the line at doctors as I wouldn’t want a local member operating on me, although they couldn’t do much worse than the bloke that tried to fix my nose.
But even more interesting would be to get them to live the life of someone trying to rear a disabled child or care for them as adults. Get them to do a stint with people living the mental health nightmare, whether working in it or living it. Or put them in a queue in the health system waiting for surgery and see how they go.
Maybe a few months living the life of someone that contributes to the community or someone that needs help might make them at least think about how much they spend on their next election campaign or whether they should be travelling business class the next time they fly.
You know 2% more doesn’t sound very much – not to someone on $200,000 – but I reckon it means a bit to the sick and needy or an essential service in need of more funding.
Someone smart once said “Life wasn’t meant to be easy”.
Maybe he should have said “2% will buy a lot of peanuts”.





Not Registered? Quick registration and comment.



