MPs' super reform is crucial to restoring faith in the system

In other words, the system encourages short termers, some might say losers.

One senior party identity told me the existing arrangements enable parties to "get rid of dead wood".

In September 1997 the Senate Select Committee on Superannuation released a report in which it concluded the parliamentary scheme was out of step with superannuation practice in the wider community, lacked transparency and was excessively generous to a small group of retiring parliamentarians.

However, despite my pestering the PM and Finance Minister and continuing concern in the community, nothing has happened.

I have consistently argued that we need to have a debate about the worth of politicians. Let's bring on that debate, perhaps inquiry, so the time, the commitment, the family sacrifices can all be aired. Then set a base salary for backbenchers and ministers and link their super to their salary like other employees.

Politicians have been running away from this debate, and have been part of a self-perpetuating system that adds more and more lurks and perks such as super, allowances and travel to offset what some regard as an inadequate salary.

But we cannot make laws for the rest of the community then set a different set of rules for ourselves.

The first step in that process is to allow freedom of choice for MPs to make their own superannuation arrangements, with the employer (the Commonwealth or State) making the same 8% contribution of salary or wages required by law of any other employer in the real world.