Revealed: Judges’, government lawyers’ pensions costing Victorian taxpayers $45m every year
Victorian taxpayers are forking out $45m a year to fund the luxurious retirements for former judges and senior government lawyers, FOI documents reveal. See the highest earners receiving $300k+ each year.
Victoria
Don't miss out on the headlines from Victoria. Followed categories will be added to My News.
The cost of the extravagant pensions paid to retired judges and senior government lawyers are costing taxpayers more than $45m a year, documents obtained under Freedom of Information laws reveal.
Victoria’s judicial pension scheme — which is the most generous in the country — funds comfortable retirements for entitled judges, lawyers and former governors, and has doubled in cost in the past decade.
The tax-free pensions are mostly worth between $260,000 and $350,000 per year, and can be claimed from as young 65, two years younger than ordinary Australians can claim the aged pension.
Analysis by the Herald Sun shows the blowout in the cost of the pension scheme is a result of former judges and government lawyers living longer, and the government increasing pensions at a higher rates than average Victorian wage growth.
Under the complex rules governing the pensions, some of the retirees, including retired governor Linda Dessau, are permitted to double-dip and claim multiple pensions.
Ms Dessau is paid a $310,650 Commonwealth pension as a former Family Court of Australia judge, as well as a “top up” Victorian pension of $39,542.
Her husband, Tony Howard, is paid a $269,095 pension as a former County Court judge, bringing the couple’s pension entitlements to almost $620,000 per year.
Depending on how long they live and the rate at which the government increases pensions, the couple’s retirements could cost taxpayers up to $14m.
Ms Dessau did not respond to questions about whether she thought such generous pension schemes were justified.
Over the past decade, the number of people entitled to judicial pensions has increased by almost two-thirds, while the amount of the full pensions paid to most retired judges has increased by between $50,000 and $60,000.
Similar lifetime pension schemes for federal and state politicians were phased out in 2004, when both major political parties, at Federal and State levels, decided lifetime pension schemes were too costly and out of line with community standards.
Another loophole in the rules also means dozens of semi-retired, “reserve” judges are taking home more than $100,000 per year more than their full-time colleagues by minimising the amount of income tax they pay.
Under the complex set of rules governing pensions, the judges can retire, claim their tax-free pension, and take part-time work as a “reserve judge”.
Depending on how they manage their taxes, semi-retired reserve judges can take home more than their full-time colleagues after working just two weeks of the year.
In the past decade, the number of “reserve” County Court judges has grown from three to 13, and the number of “reserve” Supreme Court judges has grown from to six to 18, but Treasury deputy general counsel Alex Price said the government could not track how much was paid in salaries to semi-retired “reserve” judges who were also being paid a pension.
A Supreme Court spokeswoman said: “Reserve Judges are experienced and highly skilled judicial officers.
“The cost of engaging reserve judges is significantly less than the cost of appointing additional judges and enables the Court to respond flexibly to changing circumstances.
“The Court is grateful that retired judges make themselves available for this work and continue to serve the community.”
Other quirks that make the generous Victorian pension scheme far more costly than other states’ schemes include judge’s pensions being paid to some government lawyers, including senior crown prosecutors and the Solicitor-General.
Other states do not pay pensions to senior crown prosecutors, and the Federal Government abolished the pension for the Commonwealth Solicitor-General in the 1990s.
The Australian Judicial Officers Association, which vigorously opposed the Albanese government’s recent proposal to impose small amounts of tax on Commonwealth judicial pensions, was approached for comment.