Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to make comment on the press release that came out this morning from the Council on the Ageing. I want to speak in some detail about what's in that release, because it should give pause to the warriors on the other side when an august institution like the Council on the Ageing, normally a measured contributor, feels the need to put out a statement of the kind that came out today.

Their chief executive, Ian Yates, expressed COTA's deep concern that the objective work of the expert Retirement Income Review is being politicised before the public has even had a chance to look at it. This is what Mr Yates said:

Our retirement income system is too important to all current and future retirees for its future to become a political football…

In a pretty clear message about what he thinks should happen next, he went on to say:

The Government has had the report for over a month and should release it, without a policy response. The Australian people deserve the chance to see, consider and discuss the Review's, data and findings.

That's all pretty sensible, isn't it? What could be preventing this? What could it be that is stopping the Australian people from having a sensible debate of the kind that Mr Yates calls for? Well, he is very clear about this. The press release notes:

Mr Yates has urged the Federal Government to haul in hyperactive backbenchers spruiking ideological agendas that are not informed by the Review and has also urged all other political actors to stop arguing their case before they have seen the work of the most important review of the retirement income sector for a generation.

It's a pretty clear message, isn't it?

Where is this review? According to the minister, it's sitting on her desk. It's sitting on Mr Frydenberg's desk and it's sitting on Mr Sukkar's desk. Why can't we see it? According to Minister Hume, it's because it's 600 pages long and it's taking a little while to go through it. Perhaps the rest of us would like to chance to go through it as well.

Who could these hyperactive backbenchers be that COTA is so concerned about? Could it be a senator in this place? Could it be Senator Bragg? Here he is on his way into the chamber. Senator Bragg has got a lovely book out. I do note that, according to the media, the Senator's entertaining book has sold, I think, a total of 34 copies. Is that right—34 copies? Obviously not all of his colleagues are interested in purchasing this marvellous book. Two of these copies, one assumes, are the copies in the Parliamentary Library. But what is Senator Bragg doing? He's out there undermining the super system—perhaps he's seen the Retirement Income Review—arguing to make it voluntary for low-income earners and arguing it that ought to be used to buy a home. He's trailing his coat about a range of reforms to undermine Australia's world-class systems.

Mr Falinski, another backbencher, is out there with an agenda that has been described by Mr Yates as ideological, calling for the superannuation increase to be abandoned and for workers to go without the increase to their superannuation. He's calling for workers to go without the money that will deliver them a secure and comfortable retirement.

Looking a little closer to home here in the Senate, is it any wonder that COTA despairs about the comments of Senator Rennick? It was only the other day that Senator Rennick, in what could only be described as an ideological contribution, invoked the statement 'Give me liberty or give me death' and invoked the revolutionary spirit in the fight against Marxism and communism. He talked about little red books and about conspiracies—which is not unusual for Senator Rennick—in an ideological campaign being run right here in the chamber under the nose of the minister, who has just walked into the chamber herself.

Perhaps it is the minister that COTA is concerned about because the minister has the Retirement Income Review and she's not willing to share it with us. But she is out there, saying that she's ambivalent about a legislated review—a legislated increase to workers' retirement incomes. In the middle of the greatest recession in a century, the minister is refusing to commit to a legislated commitment that would provide retirement security to millions of Australian workers. That ambivalence could cost a 30-year-old nurse $121,000 by retirement. That is how the Morrison government seeks to repay the front-line workers who are working through this pandemic to save lives. This is the same minister who bungled the early release scheme, ignored warnings about fraud and dismissed the warnings from industry experts with knowledge of how superannuation actually works.

I think people ought to listen to COTA. I think it is time to abandon the ideological campaign against super. It's time to release the Retirement Income Review because, as COTA says, the consumer organisations, the financial services sector and academic experts have put a huge amount of time and effort into contributing to the review. They have every right to have their efforts respected by the public release of the review report in a timely fashion so that it can inform public discussion.