LAURA JAYES:
Let's go straight to Melbourne now. Senior Minister in the Morrison Government, Jane Hume joins me. Jane Hume, thanks so much for your time. What is your view of these allegations at the moment? First with the allegation we heard of last week, should the Minister in question, unnamed, stand aside until there is some kind of inquiry or investigation?
JANE HUME:
Laura, before we get into that, let me take a step back and say that all the allegations that we've heard in the last fortnight have been quite distressing, and distressing not just for the women in parliament, distressing for the many men as well. We know that these stories are sadly all too common, not just in parliament but, of course, in many workplaces, universities, office Christmas parties, sporting clubs. And there would ‑ you would be hard pressed to find somebody that hasn't either had a similar experience themselves or know somebody that has had a similar experience, which I think is why this is all the more distressing. I think that the decision to have an independent review cross‑party at arm's length to government into the effectiveness, the adequacy of support measures that are available to people working in parliament is exactly the right measure to take. As far as the allegations that we've heard just over the weekend, I think that Simon Birmingham said it as accurately as he could that every person is entitled to natural justice. The best place for these investigations is with the police and that's where it should stop and start.
LAURA JAYES:
If the police are unable to investigate because the victim is now deceased, then the next step, and there are calls for some kind of judicial inquiry, what's your view of that?
JANE HUME:
Well, whatever inquiry takes place, it's certainly inappropriate for the inquiry to take place within the media or to be politicised, weaponised and politicised, because that is probably the greatest barrier to a fair trial and would, in fact, you know, prejudice a case more than anything else. So any investigation should remain with police and that's where it should start, that's where it should stop.
LAURA JAYES:
These are historic claims, of course. I think what you're saying there, when it's not done by the police or the judiciary, are you saying that these kinds of allegations have the risk of being weaponised by politics?
JANE HUME:
I think that we saw that just in the last two weeks, that allegations can be weaponised and politicised, and that actually threatens the outcome of any investigation. The most important thing with any allegation is that the police are allowed to do their job, that they're allowed to do so outside of the spotlight, and that, you know, justice is appropriately served.
LAURA JAYES:
How is this reflecting on our political leaders at the moment, do you think?
JANE HUME:
I think, as I said at the beginning, it's been a very difficult time and distressing time for everybody because it is so relatable, and it is sadly so common. It's something that is unacceptable, it's not okay. Prime Minister said it's not okay. And that's why we are dealing with it with this independent review that Simon Birmingham is undertaking, setting the terms of reference right now. An independent review with cross‑party support that is held at arm's length to government, and that's the right way to deal with these allegations. We want to make sure that everybody feels safe to come to work at parliament. Indeed, we would like people to feel safe going to work in any workplace and, you know, you'd know, Laura, a newsroom is a very robust and, you know, demanding and high‑adrenaline environment too, similar to Parliament House and, you know, same goes for universities and sporting clubs and, you know, these things can happen anywhere. We want to make sure that everybody feels safe when they come to work.
LAURA JAYES:
Absolutely. And look, it's hard to move on and talk about anything else when this is happening in our parliament at the moment. But I am going to do that today because I do want to get you on to talk about superannuation. So without having a very good segue at all, let's talk about super, because Josh Frydenberg did flag at the weekend that he sees that there needs to be more flexibility in super. Now, what does "flexibility" actually mean? What do you think? What do you think that means in terms of the future of our structure of superannuation? Should we be able to use it to buy homes, for example?
JANE HUME:
Well, Laura, you know, our superannuation system is — our compulsory superannuation system is nearly 30 years old and we know that it's served Australians very well, and that more people are retiring with more money than ever before. But it's not a perfect system by any stretch. Fees are still way too high. There's duplicate accounts in the system, so people get charged two sets of fees, two sets of insurances. Some of those insurances have been inappropriately applied in the past. And there's still this great tail of underperforming funds that because of the opacity and also the disengagement from the system, people don't even know when they're in an underperforming fund. Now, we have introduced to parliament the Your Future, Your Super reforms. They've gone through the House of Representatives and are with the Senate right now to address some of those issues. Getting rid of those duplicate accounts, by making sure that your superannuation follows you from job to job, making competitive pressure on those super funds by setting a benchmark test that they have to pass before they're allowed to — and if they don't pass it in terms of their performance, they have to notify their members. If they don't pass it two years in a row, they can't accept new members. And we'll also do an online comparison tool so that people can find a better super fund and one that better suits their needs. All up, those reforms will put back into the super funds of Australians around $17.9 billion. It's not just about flexibility. It's also about making sure that the system works harder for you, the money you already have works harder for you right now.
LAURA JAYES:
Jane Hume, it sounds like you want to be the Minister to fundamentally change the way super operates in this country; is that true?
JANE HUME:
Well, I think this is over the last two years we've made some significant changes already. We've introduced choice to superannuation. You can now choose which super fund you want to be in, rather than being forced into a fund by your employer. We've brought down fees by capping them and making sure that you don't get charged a fee on the way out a door. We've introduced a superannuation guarantee amnesty which has put more money back into people's accounts. We've just passed in the Senate last week the eligible — the demise of Eligible Rollover Funds. These are old‑fashioned products that really don't have a home anymore, to again consolidate your superannuation into one account. We've already made great strides in reforming superannuation. You know, it took a Labor Government to create super. That's part of their mythology, that's right, but it's certainly taken a Coalition government to reform it.
LAURA JAYES:
Okay. It sounds like there's a lot more to come. Jane Hume, as always, thanks so much for your time.
JANE HUME:
Great to be with you, Laura.