PM Transcripts

FOR MEDIA WEDNESDAY 27 OCTOBER 1982
PUBLIC SECTOR WAGES IN TIE CAIN BUDGET
I find it extraordinary that Mr Cain should expect praise for
the Victor-ian Government in relation to wage restraint. ( The
Herald, 26 October, 1982).
The Victorian Budget provides for an enormous 17.6% increase
in public sector wage and salary payments in 1932-83. ( See
Budget Document No. 5 page 73).
Even allowing for some carry-over fromrf 1982-82 settlements,
one can only conclude that the Victorian Government is
prepared to allow substantial wage and salary increases for
its public servants. For Mr Jolly refers in his Budget sp~ cech
to the fact that the Budget is based " on the maintenance of
public sector employment" ( Budget Paper No. 1, p. 3) and to
" approximately unchanged levels of crployment" ( Budget Paper
No. 1, p. 8).
Indeed, Mr Cain himself concedes the point when he refers to
" wage agreements which had reflected nothing more than
community movement" ( Herald, 26 October 1.981). In current
circumstances, it is essential that governments give a lead in
wage restraint to the community.
The fact that Mr Cain complains about criticisms of his
Government's wage policies shows his sensitivity on this
issue. I had not even drawn attention to these public secLor
wage rises in the Victorian Budget.
I was making the point that the Commonwealth Budget
established the conditions for wage restraint by making many
average Australian families $ 18 or $ 19 a week better off, and
that it was unfortunate that State Government Budgets
undermined these conditions by taking back much of these
benefits through increased State taxes and charges. I pointed
out that on Eric Risstrom's figures, the cost of the Victorian
Budget for Victorian families was $ 12 a week on average. This
is damaging enough in itself, but when it is combined with the
excessive public sector increases in the Victorian Budget, it
must inevitably damage the cause of wage restraint enormously.
ooo000ooo.---