Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Childcare) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today I rise to highlight the ongoing discrimination faced by same-sex couples across Australia in the important area of superannuation. Despite continued assurances from the government that they are just about to fix this problem, nearly two years down the track, after firm commitments were given, many same-sex couples are waiting in hope that the anomalies they face will be rectified.

We know that the government has given same-sex couples some rights in superannuation but that those rights are restricted to private sector superannuation schemes and are given through a newly established category of ‘interdependent relationships’. The commitments that were given for public sector super have not been kept.

I want to talk briefly about some of the areas in which same-sex couples still face discrimination when it comes to superannuation. One that springs to mind is the legislation introduced last year which allowed couples to split their superannuation contributions at the end of each financial year to reduce the amount of tax they pay on those contributions. I believe that up to 100 per cent of personal contributions and 85 per cent of deductible contributions made after 1 January 2006 are able to be split with a spouse. For couples that are able to split their superannuation, the main benefit is that they can take advantage of two tax-free thresholds of $129,751. The result is that couples will be able to have more of their savings for retirement.

Unfortunately, same-sex couples are not able to split their superannuation contributions with their partner, even though it is their own money and they worked for it just like the people who are able to split their contributions. The government knocked back an amendment proposed in the Senate by the Labor Party and the Democrats that would have corrected this anomaly. We believe that same-sex couples and others in interdependent relationships should have the same access to benefits as do people in heterosexual relationships and should be able to determine where they put their money.

Another area of superannuation where discrimination still exists is in spouse co-contributions and the spouse rebate. Under current legislation, a person who is married or in a heterosexual de facto relationship may make an after-tax contribution on behalf of their partner. But if the partner earns less than $10,800 in a year then the contributor can claim an 18 per cent income tax rebate for contributions up to $3,000 per year that they have made on behalf of their partner. Same-sex couples are not eligible for this rebate, even though they may still be able to make contributions on behalf of their low-income partner.

However, the main area of superannuation where same-sex couples are yet to have equal rights is in some public sector superannuation schemes, particularly in relation to the payment of death benefits. These schemes are the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme, the Public Sector Superannuation Scheme, the PSS Accumulations Plan, the Military Superannuation and Benefits Scheme, the Defence Forces Retirement and Death Benefits Scheme and the Parliamentary Contributory Superannuation Scheme. This is an area that the government could most easily change.

Current general superannuation rules which apply to non-government superannuation schemes, rules introduced by the government in 2004, allow for those in an interdependent relationship to receive a deceased member’s superannuation benefit on a concessionally taxed basis and to receive the deceased partner’s superannuation pension or reversionary benefit. However, the current legislation and rules governing the operation of the Commonwealth defined benefits superannuation schemes prevent the entitlement of the same benefits occurring within public sector schemes.

The definition of ‘spouse’ for superannuation purposes within the public sector schemes means a partner of the opposite sex—it includes only heterosexual partners. Therefore, the death benefits payable from the Commonwealth defined benefits superannuation schemes are payable only to a member’s or ex-member’s opposite-sex spouse, either de facto or married. Same-sex partners of deceased members who are not being classified as a spouse are denied access to these benefits, where for other superannuation schemes they have access.

In a press conference on 27 May 2004, the Prime Minister said:

The Government has decided to expand the definition of dependant for the purposes of paying superannuation death benefits to include a person in an interdependent relationship.

The government’s rhetoric has always included same-sex de facto relationships. This was backed up later by a commitment from Senator Coonan in a speech to the Senate on 12 August 2004, when she said:

The superannuation laws, where the definition of ‘dependant’ has been changed, have no doubt been canvassed in earlier speeches. I have initiated a review of Commonwealth superannuation schemes for consistency with the government’s policy to recognise interdependent relationships for superannuation death benefits.

That was almost two years ago. Again I say that ‘interdependent’, in the government’s book, has always included same-sex de facto relationships. The commitment was restated by a spokesperson on behalf of Senator Nick Minchin to the Sydney Star Observer on 17 March 2005, over a year ago. The spokesperson said:

The Government is preparing the legislative changes in relation to the interdependent relations [...] We are reviewing what needs to be done and the legislative changes will be put to the Senate as soon as possible.

That was over a year ago. I do not know what ‘as soon as possible’ means if we are talking about a year at a time. When questioned in a Senate estimates hearing in February this year about when the government would fulfil their commitment in this area, Senator Minchin said:

She—

referring to Senator Coonan—

made a commitment to Senator Greig on 23 June 2005 to make inquiries into the progress of changes to all Commonwealth super schemes to allow payment of superannuation death benefits for persons in an interdependent relationship. The commitment was to make inquiries into the progress of changes. I have not had drawn to my attention an unconditional commitment by Senator Coonan or anybody else in authority to make those changes.

That is the worst case of back-pedalling I have seen.

When the government made their attack on gay men and lesbians by beating up the issue of same-sex marriage, the sweetener, if you could call it that, was saying to those communities: ‘We’re going to go you on marriage but, I will tell you what: we’ll fix up superannuation for you. You’re not going to be financially disadvantaged.’ We now have back-pedalling away from this commitment. The minister should be listening to his colleagues. If he did, he would know that there has been a firm commitment since May 2004 that interdependent couples would have equal access to superannuation. I think that trying to slide out of this commitment now will not wash with the gay and lesbian community.

It goes without saying that going through the trauma of losing a loved one is devastating enough without having to worry about how you will financially survive. The dearest wish of someone who is sick and facing death is to make sure that the people they love and are leaving behind are well provided for. There is no logical reason why a person in a same-sex relationship should not receive the same entitlements after the death of a partner as someone in a heterosexual relationship. It is the money of the contributor to the superannuation scheme that is in question, and they should have every right to decide where that money goes.

A Labor government would recognise same-sex relationships in this area. We would equalise the treatment of same-sex relationships when it comes to superannuation. I would like to draw to the attention of the House the great work of the AIDS Council of New South Wales and the Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby (New South Wales), who are working on this issue and raising awareness in the gay and lesbian community about the issues of continuing discrimination in superannuation.