JUDGE’S $3M PAYOUT . . . AND YOU PICKED UP THE TAB
● Dame Sian Elias is leaving the law with a platinumplated superannuation entitlement of public money. ● The retiring Supreme Court chief justice’s nest egg comes from a uniquely generous super scheme that matches $7.50 for each dollar judges contribute.
Retiring Supreme Court chief justice Dame Sian Elias is leaving the role with a platinum-plated superannuation entitlement seeded with at least $3.3 million of public money.
That nest egg comes from a uniquely generous super scheme that sees judges, including Elias, able to contribute up to 5 per cent of their salaries to a superannuation fund that is then topped up by $7.50 for each dollar they contribute.
ACT Party leader David Seymour said a similar, albeit less generous, scheme for MPs — seeing contributions from Parliamentarians matched with a $2.50 subsidy — was widely-considered to be gold-plated.
“I’ve long thought MPs’ superannuation was pretty generous, but, actually, it’s tidbits compared with a 7.5 times contribution matching.
“There are useful constitutional reasons for judges to be independent, well-paid and above bribery, but $3m? That’s a lot she’s above.”
Elias is married to Fletcher Challenge chief executive Hugh Fletcher. The Fletcher family are reportedly worth $105m.
She was appointed to the High Court in 1995, has been the country’s chief jurist since 1999 and had led the Supreme Court — the country’s highest — since its formation in 2004.
Based on two decades of Remuneration Authority decisions outlining Elias’ salary and other benefits, starting in 1995 with a total package of $205,400 and ending with this year’s earnings of $739,950, Elias has been entitled to contribute $441,395 over the years — and had it bolstered with $2.85m in matching subsidies.
Depending on how the sum was invested, the retirement package could be worth millions more. If her fund achieved returns equivalent to the average performance of the NZX50 index over the past decade — 6.69 per cent — Herald on Sunday modelling suggests Elias will leave next March with around $6.5m.
A spokesperson for the courts said Elias was in Australia and unable to comment.
Constitutional conventions based on ensuring the judiciary has independence from the executive has seen parliamentarians shy away from criticising or amending the scheme, with salaries and superannuation entitlements instead set by the independent Remuneration Authority.
Dame Fran Wilde, chairwoman of the authority, said: “This is not a golden handshake, but a wellestablished constitutional obligation.”
She said the scheme was designed to ensure the integrity of the judicial system by ensuring judges were “free from income pressures both during their time on the bench and afterwards” and was similar to arrangements in other countries.
Wilde noted Elias’ tenure was unusually long — with the judges typically serving 16 years on the bench compared with Elias’ 24.
The new Government has made reining in high-end public sector salaries a priority, making high-profile decisions to can performance bonuses for Ministry chief executives and freezing the pay of MPs.
Otago University law professor Andrew Geddis said New Zealand had legislation prohibiting cuts to judicial pay or conditions, and a case in Canada in the 1980s over a proposal to have judges contribute more to their super schemes was rejected — by judges of the supreme court — as unconstitutional.
“That’s the constitutional problem underlying all of this: The separation of powers. The idea that the executive branch could set the terms and conditions of the judiciary is much more fraught than, for instance, setting public service salaries.”
Elias and her husband qualify for fortnightly Superannuation payments of $701.52 and free public transport through the SuperGold Card.