Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Families and Payments) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Social Services. Last week the Minister for Social Services told retirees they must 'run down their superannuation savings to maintain their incomes.' But, today's Financial Review reports the minister has 'no intention of forcing Australians to withdraw more from their superannuation nest eggs.' When will the minister stop the chaos and confusion and give retirees the certainty they deserve?

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Minister for Social Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will try to make this simple. This is how it works: there are tax concessions started under those opposite that are rightly given by the government so people can save for their retirement. They earned that money and they do not pay as much tax on that money so they can put it into superannuation and draw down on it in their retirement. The reason those tax concessions are important is that people do not have to draw down on a pension. That is a fairly straightforward proposition which those on this side of the House understand.

We have said in this budget that we want to ensure that those on modest and low levels of assets are able to get a pension increase. One hundred and seventy thousand people will get a pension increase—on average, $30 a fortnight—as a result of the changes to pensions we have introduced as part of this budget. Also as a result of the changes, we are going back to the $3 taper rate which existed under those opposite. It was started by Paul Keating. It ran all the way through the Howard government until 2007. We are going to restore that taper rate as a result of the budget. When the taper rate was changed back in 2007, we had around $40 billion in the bank and a $20 billion surplus. Where did that go? We might ask the member for Lilley where that went, because he spent it all. He spent it all and, as a result, we are making this change to what we are doing with pensions in the budget.

It is a simple proposition. If you are not receiving a part pension then you can draw down on the superannuation savings that you have made to draw down on in your retirement. That is what you can do. All we are doing is ensuring we have a pension that is there to help those most in need. We did not create the pension as some sort of superannuation incentive. That is what the tax concessions are for. I note that the member for McMahon has equated the tax concessions for compulsory superannuation contributions with a pension or welfare payment. That is amazing—that those opposite actually equate people's own money and the tax concessions that are provided to help people save for their retirement so they do not have to draw down on the pension to a welfare payment. There would have been antique clocks smashing all over Woollahra when the former Treasurer and former Prime Minister Paul Keating found out that his apparent heir apparent over there, the member for McMahon—good old PJ lite!—thought that the tax concessions that he put in place to ensure that people could save for their retirement were some form of welfare payment. He would be ashamed of him.

Jenny Macklin (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Families and Payments) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Speaker, I seek leave to table the two documents that show that this minister has two completely contradictory—

Leave not granted.