What we're talking about

Peter Byrne on Asylum seekers before homeless Julia Gillard / Kevin Rudd / Wayne Swan / Bob Brown and The Unionists who shall remain faceless, are at this time in ... more
vince on Odd behaviour? What's odd about this is Rebecca Wilson thinking Australians have an absolute RIGHT to know more about the man with whom our ... more
Phil of Springwood on Rudd wasn't killed... he topped himself And now that real Labour man, Mark Latham, has cometo the forefront for the cause and called on Kevin Rudd to come clean and ... more
Richard on Dinner with WikiLeaks Mr Wikileaks has some serious mental issues.Because he believes all information should be made public, there should be a ... more
greg on Commissioner Bob Atkinson smithy, i saw an ad for the qnu last night on the telly and i was astounded that a union, with members who can not even get ... more
taxpayer on Asylum seekers before homeless The asylum seekers should be sent back to fight for their own country. Instead our Government sends our troops over there to ... more
Shorty - Police aircraft on Odd behaviour? Neil Roberts thinks that we are all as stupid as he is when it comes to his thinking on aircraft in policing..Maybe when ... more
Brian....Alderley on Guess who? A set of specks and Dame Edna, step aside...!!! more
Ryan Williamson on Dinner with WikiLeaks i've read and seen a few interviews now with Julian, and must say I think he is doing a great job in getting this ... more
Jennifer Nash on Commissioner Bob Atkinson There is no genuine public consultation on anything and we really do need citizen initiated referenda on demand. The people ... more
bigfella on Toll woes Jo Jud, you make an excellent observation. While the shortfalls of the Labor Government in Queensland are increasingly ... more
Brett on Achieving family not wanted Look, this BS about turning the boats around is just Abbott talk. What really happens is this:You intercept the boat, ... more
bigbrownbear on Original unedited interview with PM MMMM Train line for redcliffe AH got a question for ya Bligh SHOW ME THE MONEY more
micko on Barnaby Joyce This is the greatest way to get people to and business to move to these areas. more
Wobblyone on Guess who? Betcha Bob Brown would find it a safe seat... lol, lol, lol. more
Wobblyone on Rudd wasn't killed... he topped himself Heh, heh, heh, heh, Oh Boy...I don't think KRUDDY is quite finished yet Phil. I think he might sink a shiv in right up to ... more
Phil of Springwood on Rudd wasn't killed... he topped himself Houston, We Have a Problem!!Prime Minister Gillard says "The Reality of the Matter Is" thats a similar quote that Beattie ... more
Anthony Gettings on Guess who? Whats he doing on the weekend more
Shorty - Tingalpa - Brunswick Heads on Commissioner Bob Atkinson Just a suggestion Bob Atkinson.. If we need helicopters & fixed wing aircraft - Anna Blight might have some of her (OUR) $3 ... more
shaunna on Guess who? I think its Ian Maurice more

Superannuation Changes

Posted by: Michael Smith | 13 May, 2009 - 1:39 PM

One of the big changes in the budget last night was the advice that people born after 1 January, 1957 will have to wait until they are 67 to receive the pension.

Most commentary about that measure has focussed on the start date – 2023. It seems a fair way off, but if you were born after 1957 this affects you.

However, hidden in the detail of the government’s papers is a much, much nastier potential change.

At present if you’ve saved for your retirement, through superannuation, you can get your money back at the age of 55. link

The current age to access your super will gradually increase to 60 years for people born after 1964. That’s the law and we all understand it.

Well Ken Henry is the head of Wayne Swan’s department. He’s currently conducting what Kevin Rudd called a “root and branch review” of the taxation system.

Part of that review includes super and pensions. And here is the recommendation about your superannuation savings. “The general access age for superannuation benefits should also increase to 67 years.” He goes on to say that “This would enhance the outcomes from the superannuation guarantee and improve the coherence of the system by strengthening the integration between the age pension and superannuation components of the retirement income system.”

Read for yourself here link

This is just appalling. Under this recommendation you will have to work for a further 7 years before you could access your own super. Your own savings.

What does that mean for manual workers? Police? Nurses? Anyone who has put money aside for their own retirement.

Kevin Rudd promised us he would not change the superannuation laws. “Not one jot, not one tittle” he said. He had better jump on Ken Henry and guarantee us this recommendation will not be accepted.

Blog comments

What the government should do is, abolish all super concessions, pay everyone of pension-age the full-age-pension and this would stop all the discrimination.Currently the government provides a safety net in the form of a Centrelink age-pension, so why should the government pander to the very rich by giving huge tax concessions.

W.Hawil Tuesday 12 January, 2010 - 3:03 PM
Why are we surprised about Mr Rudd's explicitly broken promise regarding Super'n? He made promises simply to gain power, it seems.

paul Thursday 4 June, 2009 - 12:01 PM
To John Forrest Friday, the fact that this change is even being considered is bad enough and is an eye opener to all. I can tell you the damage is already been done. If you came to my workplace (a blue collar unionisedone at that) you would see it for yourself.
Goodbye Mr KRudd

John Wednesday 20 May, 2009 - 2:42 AM
Hi everyone - can anybody show me a media or government reference to the proposal to tie up super til age 67 which hasn't come from Fairfax Media?
I've been doing some searching on the net and all the reports I've found so far have come only from Fairfax-controlled sources - Business Day, The Age, and 4BC.
I'm beginning to think that Fairfax is either being mischievous or they've muddled up their facts. Happy to be proved otherwise, though.

Trev Monday 18 May, 2009 - 3:11 PM
I'm an air traffic controller. Do you really want me pushing tin at 67?
Is this Rudd's idea of looking after working families?

Mr Magoo Friday 15 May, 2009 - 8:55 PM
Michael,
Regarding your comments on accessing superannuation.

Once again you have not let the true facts get in the way of a good story and as a result would appear to have caused some listeners various levels of anxiety.

The facts are:

The age of 67 is merely a proposal by Mr Henry

The access age for superannuation only increases to 60 by 2024

The proposal is that the access age be gradually increased to 67 by the year 2038.

The latter is 29 years into the future by which time they estimate the female life expectancy to be 96 years of age and the male life expectancy to be 93 years of age.

Remember also that by that time the ratio of working people available to fund pension payments compared to the number of people eligible to receive a pension payment will be significantly less than the current ratio.

Instead of continually communiating seriously misleading information to your listeners ( on all sorts of subjects )perhaps you could adopt a more informed and balanced approach.

Presently you come across as nothing more than a lightweight, right wing drama queen trying to appeal to listeners of a similar ilk.All we need now are some good old conspiracy theories to be espoused.

John Forrest Friday 15 May, 2009 - 6:49 PM