THE PRESS FRIDAY, MARCH 18, 1988. Settling on superannuation

Press, 18 March 1988, Page 20

THE PRESS FRIDAY, MARCH 18, 1988. Settling on superannuation

The Royal Commission on Social Policy has presented a broad outline of the recommendations it will make in its report due for release next month. The Prime Minister, Mr Lange, is waiting until the full report is issued before he comments on the recommendations in detail. By then he should have the advantage of an audit by Government officials that will measure the cost of the various suggestions. He is wise no! to endorse or dismiss the recommendations too hastily; the financial implications must be taken into account. One very sound recommendation that he could pursue immediately, however, would not imperil the State coffers; Thislis the call for immediate, bipartisan action on national superannuation. Without doubt, the national superannuation scheme will be changed. Everybody seems agreed on the need to do something about it, if only in the interests of economy. There is precious little agreement, though, on what that something should- be. Few will have forgotten that the present scheme, now said to be a fast track to = national beggary, was an electioneering response to a pension scheme that the Labour Party had hoped would keep it in power. Few would deny that the presentscheme played a large part in;the National Party’s 1975 General Election victory. No-one could deny that on every occasion since then on which attempts have been made to modify the scheme, the endeavour has foundered on party politicking and political point-scoring. Both Mr Lange and the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Bolger, accept the principle of a common approach when questioned about it, but neither seems ready to make the first move. Mr Lange says a Government offer to collaborate is open; he also says that he has not approached Mr Bolger fofmally on the point, preferring to rely on a briefing Mr Bolger was given by the Royal Commission. Mr Bolger, for his part, says the invitation to work on a bipartisan approach reached him not through the Prime Minister’s office, but through the news media. He is not happy with this and, in any event, doubts .that a workable consensus could be achieved, particularly since the Government has persisted with its plans to abolish taxation incentives for people to provide for their own retirement through private superannuation schemes. This is hardly good enough from either politician. For any real advance to be made in settling the future of the scheme, it must he done outside party politics. It would be best for everyone — taxpayer, superannuitant, and politician alike — if the present one 7 upmanship could be set aside. For most people, a fair proportion of their working life is aimed at ensuring a comfortable retirement untroubled by

i ! J |h financial worries. Planning for retirement, and coping .with it when it arrives, are made much more difficult wjhen national superannuation, a pivotal element ip ithe calculations, is subject to; change and uncertainty. The ! Government has compounded the difficulties by introducing a whole new range of doubts about what people can do to provide for ihemselves. |p ; It has added to these .by allowing a contradiction to invade; its general ecohotnic thin, ing: tax levels arejdevisdd, it is said, to provide incentives to yyork and earn more; then tax changes are made, or contemplated, to penalise those who save for their future. Many must ask: What is thejpoint?; ;| L. The Royal Commission has proposed one way out of the economic vice of taxpayers sustaining superannuation payments to;' an ever-increasing proportion ofi the population; the National Party has, already proposed its own. If the party is confident that what it suggests is the best wdy possible to amend the scheme, it need do ;no mbre than submit the scheme to a .bipartisan committee of review. If the scheme were adopted,) all would know who thought off it first; though the National Party can be relied on to remind us all, just in case. If some; refinements or improvements are found during the process, ' well and good. ; i jl If the political parties that have a chance, realistically, of governing the country are to agree on a superannuation scheme that they vjill be prepared to leave alone,'they will also hdve to agree.in broad terms on a number of other aspects of the social welfare package. National superannuation cannot be viewed in isolation. This need not be fatal t!o the search for consensus; for; a long time.| and during successive administrations of both jjaHies, Labour and National were in general accord on most aspects of social welfare. If the first steps to renewing a common; consent bn what the welfare system should achieve cannot be taken until'jMr Lange formally offers and Mr Bolger formally ; accepts, a bipartisan committee of review, they 'had best !get on with the formalities. I j ;'I j , The Royal Commission iias focused accurately on the need a bipartisan approach on national superannuation. Oniy by a bipartisan approach is theicouitry likely to get a scheme that is sufficiently supported by both parties to have a j bet :eij-than--even chance of remaining in force long enough for people to plan their futures ijpon i it j with confidence. Without some co-operation between the maid political; parlies, the, best that can be said for any modifications' is that they are likely to (last at least until the; next General Election. Any political party) which fails to recognise that voters need and deserve a better deal than this' does sb at its P eril - ' I ~' | j j j | )' :