The Australia Post chief executive, Ahmed Fahour, has labelled Pauline Hanson’s comments about his religion “sad” and said he “feels sorry” for her for making them during the national furore about his $5.6m remuneration package.
In evidence to Senate estimates on Tuesday, Fahour denied resigning due to external pressure but acknowledged he was prepared to do “anything it takes” to protect the company in the face of an onslaught of criticism.
Fahour resigned last Thursday after a rolling controversy about his salary stoked in part by Hanson. He maintained he had left at a time of his choosing, but on Tuesday acknowledged that criticism of his pay had “sharpened his mind” about the timing of his departure.
The Australia Post chairman, John Stanhope, told the committee the board had received a letter from the communications minister, Mitch Fifield, and the finance minister, Mathias Cormann, asking it to consider the matter of Fahour’s pay, but denied being otherwise pressured by the government to cut executive pay.
Fahour said he did not resign “because of pressure from anybody”.
Guardian Australia reported last week Fahour and the board of Australia Post was told by the government in mid-February the chief executive needed to take a pay cut or action would be taken against the board.
Asked on Tuesday if he left out of fear the board would be sacked, Fahour said that was “history now”. “I will do anything it takes, within the law, to protect this brand and the employees of this company.”
Fahour was asked about Hanson’s comments that she has a problem with his religion “if he’s actually a fundamentalist and follows the Koran to the letter, which I think denigrates women”.
The Australia Post chief executive said the comments were “ill-informed” and “very hurtful” to himself, his wife and four children.
“We love our country – I love our country so much. I’m grateful for every opportunity it has given our family.
“So I feel sorry for Hanson that she feels the needs to say those things.”
Fahour said the comments were “sad” but he did not believe other senators shared Hanson’s views.
Hanson has denied her political attacks on Fahour had anything to do with racism, or objections to his religion.
Despite Hanson’s trenchant criticism of Fahour’s generous remuneration package, the One Nation leader was not present for Tuesday’s Senate estimates hearing – which was noted by other members of the committee.
Where is Pauline Hanson? After bragging about Aus Post she hasn't shown up to Senate Estimates. pic.twitter.com/XcpSdy718N
— Sam Dastyari (@samdastyari) February 28, 2017
Fahour was asked whether his departure from Australia Post triggered a termination payment. He told the committee he structured his departure as a resignation so it would not trigger a termination payment. “There’s no golden handshake, there’s no watch, I hope I’ll get a stamp though,” he quipped.
Before Fahour’s testimony, Fifield said he had a conversation with Stanhope shortly after he became minister in September 2015 at which he commented that executive pay was a matter that drew attention from time to time.
Stanhope could not recall the conversation but said it had “probably” happened.
Stanhope recalled a conversation with then-communications minister Malcolm Turnbull shortly after September 2013 at which Turnbull queried why executive pay was so high at Australia Post.
Stanhope said it was to attract executive talent, because Australia Post is a parcel business that competes with commercial operators.
Stanhope conceded it was a mistake for Australia Post not disclose the CEO’s pay when the regime changed in 2015 and no longer required it.
When asked if he agreed it was a mistake, Fahour said it was not a matter for him, but he accepted it was “regrettable” that non-disclosure had added to a perception that Post lacked transparency.
Earlier in the day, Fifield told the committee he had only “general awareness” of Fahour’s remuneration arrangements before they were made public and became the subject of controversy.
Asked whether he was sorry the Australia Post CEO had resigned , Fifield replied: “Everyone has to move on at some point.”
Labor and the Greens pushed Fifield about why the government had taken action against executive remuneration at Australia Post, by enlisting the Remuneration Tribunal to establish the parameters of the CEO’s package in the future – but had taken no action in other comparable government businesses, such as the national broadband network.
The Labor senator Sam Dastyari told Fifield during the hearing he believed the government had done the right thing by ensuring executive pay at Australia Post would be lower in the future, “I just think you should do it at the NBN as well.”
Fifield shrugged off that suggestion, saying the circumstances of the two businesses were quite different.
He said there was strong competition to attract a CEO with experience in the telecommunications sector to run the NBN, while Australia Post was a “mature” and not very complex business.
Fifield also faced pressure during the hearings from the Greens.
The Greens treasury spokesman, Peter Whish-Wilson, confessed to feeling “fascinated” why Fahour had been “thrown under the bus” when other chief executives of government businesses seemed to face no public pressure, even though they were paid substantial salaries.
Asked whether Hanson had played any role in Fahour’s departure, given she campaigned strenuously against his remuneration once it was made public on social media channels, Fifield replied: “We march to the beat of our own drum.”
The Greens leader, Richard Di Natale, asked Fifield whether Fahour’s faith and ethnicity were factors in the controversy.
“No,” Fifield replied.
