Senator ROBERT RAY (5:30 PM) —I am getting a bit nostalgic about the Democrats today. I can remember, back in 1987, during the federal election, all the MPs were assembled at Customs House when the window cleaners' equipment broke and there were three of them dangling there for their lives, hanging on the side of the building. The TV cameras from all four channels all rushed in. What did the Democrats do? They got a sign that said `Vote Democrat' and every time there was a camera they ran around and put that sign in front of it. I thought that was the greatest act of political opportunism I had ever seen. Congratulations, Senator Murray, you have topped it today with this resolution.

The whole point about this sort of travel is that, if it is being abused, we crack down on the abuse. The first change brought in was that there were only 25 trips a year as opposed to unlimited trips. Prior to that, we changed the definition. Why did we change the definition? Because one of your former leaders was using this particular emolument to go on a speaker's tour and the cost of his airfares was going in his pocket. I would get very nasty about that, except one person from the Labor Party and one person from the Liberal Party were doing it at the same time, so it is mutually assured destruction to go down that path.

This was an entitlement granted by the Remuneration Tribunal. It is regarded as an overall part of the package. You want to get some brownie points by removing part of it. It will not be replaced by anything—at least not in a historical sense—and you will get praise in the press for a day until they turn on you on some other issue. Enjoy the brownie points, but I do not see why MPs, under public pressure, should have to give up all their entitlements piece by piece. Frankly, my constituents would like me to walk to Canberra. They would like me to pay for my own meal on the way—fair enough. They do not like me very much, or you; they don't. It is not because of this particular entitlement; it is because it has been institutionalised in this country to dislike MPs. It makes them feel better—good!—but we have a duty not to give in to that sort of mob approach. This is just one aspect of it; it is not a very important one. I would not mind having to account for how often I have used entitlements for my spouse. It would be lucky if it was one Canberra trip a year in 21 years, whereas some people have used 200 in that time.

Senator Murray —You are a current member; that is fair enough.

Senator ROBERT RAY —I am a current member. I am also a gold pass holder. I admit that right now; it is unlimited. I have been a gold pass holder for five, six, seven or eight years.

Senator Murray —You are current.

Senator ROBERT RAY —I am saying I have not used entitlements I could have used. I have never tried to maximise them at any level. I have not used my charter allowance—not one cent of it—in the last 15 years.

Senator Allison —You should get out in the bush more.

Senator ROBERT RAY —Senator Allison, if you want to get to abuse of entitlements, everyone knows where the Democrats in Victoria are run from. They are run from your office, and you know it.

Honourable senators interjecting—

Senator ROBERT RAY —Oh, really? No paper from your office has ever been used for the Democrat party? No photocopying cartridges, identically? Rubbish. You have some good liars on board. You may be right, but then there are few people who have been telling fibs to me about the operation of the Democrats in Victoria.

In the end, if this resolution is carried it will go to the government and the government will say, `This is a matter for the Remuneration Tribunal.' Nothing will happen with it; absolutely nothing. Senator Faulkner is right: we should not set our own entitlements. That is absolutely right. The Remuneration Tribunal should set them.

Senator Faulkner —Increase or reduce.

Senator ROBERT RAY —We should not increase or reduce them, as Senator Faulkner says. Leave it to an independent body to determine them, and then at least we would be isolated from some criticism in relation to this. Today it will be the gold pass, tomorrow it will be some other issue, and then, Senator Murray, you will find yourself under a whole heap of pressure to give up something you may not want to give up. I do not think that is a very rational way of approaching things.