Joe Bullock (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Treasurer, Senator Cormann. I refer to the Prime Minister's pre-election promise last year that, 'There'll be no unexpected adverse changes to people's superannuation.' Does the government stand by the Prime Minister's pre-election promise?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We absolutely do. Sadly, Senator Bullock obviously did not listen to what I had to say in the chamber during the debate, because what the Senate did today was not an adverse change to superannuation, at all. What I would advise Senator Bullock to do is to read very carefully the statements that were made by the now Leader of the Opposition Mr Shorten, when he was the Minister for Financial Services and Superannuation. The point that Mr Shorten made then, and that I agree with today, is that increases in compulsory superannuation come out of people's wages. The Senate has voted today to ensure that we allow people to keep more of their own wages today so that they can decide how to deploy those wages. Guess what? People are free to decide whether they want to invest that money in paying off their mortgage faster or invest that money by saving it in superannuation, attracting the concessional tax treatment up to the concessional contribution limit. What the Senate did today was empower workers across the country to make their own decisions.

We absolutely stand by the commitment we made in the lead-up to the election not to make any unexpected adverse changes to superannuation. The change the Senate has passed today is a good change for working families across Australia. It will help them pay off their mortgages faster. It will help them with their cost-of-living pressures today. It will help them put more money into superannuation voluntarily in the form of tax advantageous savings, if they so choose. But, importantly, what we did today is help build a stronger, more prosperous economy which will help to create more opportunities for more Australians to work, get better wages and get better superannuation. Over time, we will still get to the 12 per cent, as previously legislated.

Joe Bullock (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I, too, refer to the changes to the superannuation guarantee which the government have rammed through the parliament today and ask: won't these changes freeze the superannuation guarantee for seven years, and isn't this an adverse change to people's superannuation?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Firstly, the short answer is no. I note that the Labor Party has never been good at maths. I thought that Senator Bullock from the great state of Western Australia, knowing his reputation in the Western Australian Labor Party, was better at maths than that. What the Senate has agreed to today is to delay further increases in compulsory super by six years, not seven. I know that the Labor Party is not strong when it comes to adding up the numbers.

A point I would also make is that it is not an adverse change. This is a change that leaves working families with more money in their pockets pre retirement. None other than the opposition leader, Bill Shorten, said that the money for increases in compulsory super comes out of people's wages. It comes out of people's wages, and people will be free to make their own judgement as to whether they want to put that money into superannuation or use it to pay off their mortgage.

Joe Bullock (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, before going to my further supplementary question, I want to rebut the adverse reflection on my mathematical capacity by saying that—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Come to the question, Senator Bullock.

Joe Bullock (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If superannuation increases do not move from July 2014 until July 2021, isn't that seven years? And, referring to the delay in the superannuation guarantee and the increase in the pension age to 70, is there anything this government will not do to undermine the financial security of Australians?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Firstly, the next increase in compulsory super was due in 2015-16. That was on 1 July 2015. I do not expect whoever wrote that question for Senator Bullock to understand that, but the next increase was due on 1 July 2015 for the 2015-16 financial year. Instead of that, the increase will now take place on 1 July 2021. Now, 21 minus 15 equals six. That is the coalition's mathematics—21 minus 15 equals six. In the Labor Party, particularly in the faction that Senator Bullock runs in Western Australia, maybe 21 minus 15 equals seven. But, on this side of the chamber, we think it is six.

The answer to the other part of the question is an absolute resounding no. We are focused on building a stronger, more prosperous economy where we can provide better opportunities for all Australians, including and in particular making sure that the— (Time expired)