E&OE TRANSCRIPT
TELEVISION INTERVIEW
SKY NEWS FIRST EDITION
THURSDAY, 23 FEBRUARY 2023
SUBJECTS: Superannuation.
PETER STEFANOVIC, HOST: Joining us live now, the Liberal Senator Hollie Hughes and Labor MP Matt Thistlethwaite. Good morning to you, Hollie and Matt. Matt we will start with you. Do you support reining in tax breaks for super balances above $3 million?
MATT THISTLETHWAITE, ASSISTANT MINISTER FOR DEFENCE: Pete, before the last election, Labor promised to review the purpose of superannuation in terms of the legislation. We’re delivering on that commitment. This week we published a discussion paper which asks the views of the Australian people about what the definition of superannuation in the legislation should be and that brings in issues of sustainability. There have been calls from the superannuation industry to cap contributions within superannuation. That’s something that will no doubt be discussed in the context of this discussion paper and in due course the government will make a decision on issues such as that. But we’re very much delivering on an election commitment to review the purpose of superannuation.
STEFANOVIC: Okay, but it seems like Jim Chalmers, though, is zeroing in on tax breaks for super balances above $3 million. Do you support that?
ASSISTANT MINISTER: Well, yeah, I certainly do support what the Treasurer has said and that’s because we’re delivering on election commitments. We promised that we would look at the purpose of superannuation. There’s been two reviews in the past of superannuation that have recommended that the purpose be legislated and that’s what we’re doing. And that will no doubt raise issues of sustainability because we saw under the previous government that they had policies to allow people to raid their superannuation savings during COVID. And we appreciate that many people were in emergency circumstances, but many weren’t. And there were no safeguards put in place to ensure that there had been a person lose their job or there had been a loss of income before people were able to withdraw from their superannuation. Now that now means a lot of those people have very small balances and are going to struggle for the rest of their working careers to generate a sustainable retirement income. So we want to look at all of those issues in the context of whether or not it’s sustainable into the future.
STEFANOVIC: Okay, let’s send it over to Hollie now. Hollie, what do you make of that?
HOLLIE HUGHES, SENATOR FOR NSW: There is just so much to unpick there. But the first thing is this is a breach of trust by the Labor Party who, Jim Chalmers, said before the election, as did Anthony Albanese, that there would be no major changes to superannuation. This is an absolute backflip by them…
STEFANOVIC: [interjecting] Is it a major change though?
HUGHES: Yes, it is. They are proposing major changes and you cannot propose changes to superannuation which is compulsorily paid into every Australian pays into this superannuation fund for their retirement. It is their money. The money that Mr Matt just referred to as being rated was supported by the Labor government for people who lost their job during COVID Now, by withdrawing from their super funds, many of those people were actually able to maintain mortgage repayments and stay in their home. We do know that owning your own home, going into retirement is one of the best ways Australians can be supported to have a safe and secure retirement. Now, what the Labor Party is now proposing as well is refusing to allow people access to superannuation, which, again, is their money for things like buying a home for women who’ve had to flee domestic violence, who’ve had a later in life separation to provide security to them and their children. There are circumstances that we need to look at, and what the Labor Party is now saying is, you’re not allowed to touch your money in your superannuation account for your own home ownership, but you certainly we’re going to be able to access it to pay for other people’s home.
STEFANOVIC: It’s not everyone, though…
HUGHES: It’s compulsory. It’s your money. The thing is, they’re saying $3 million. Now, this is all about creep. Look at what Labor does, not what they say. They started before the election saying there’d be no major changes. Now they’re saying if you’ve got a balance over $3 million, well, if you look at the rate of return now, even if you had $5 million in super, you’re looking at around $100,000 a year, Annuity. Now, for some people, that’s a lot of money. For others that have other expenses, that’s not a huge amount of money, but we’re talking about balances over.
STEFANOVIC: Okay, but what about, just to bring you up there. So just that there’s 36,000 Australians or thereabouts that have more than $3 million in super, so it only affects a small section of the Australian public who may be benefiting from generous tax breaks. So is it fair that they are able to benefit from those generous tax breaks, which is beyond what the original modus operandi of super was designed to be?
HUGHES: When superannuation was developed, it was so that people could save for their own retirement. Everything that’s been put in place around superannuation has allowed for long term planning. And that’s exactly what superannuation is. You start putting superannuation in your 20s, you’re not accessing it for nearly 50 years. It’s long-term planning. And people have made decisions because of the way superannuation has been set up to invest more money into their superannuation fund over time, which is long term planning on these people’s behalf. You cannot change the goalposts on people that are going to have a significant impact on their retirement. And this is absolutely what Labor is doing and goes right in the face of what they said before the election.
STEFANOVIC: Okay, Matt, back to you then. Angus Taylor, he’s going to be giving a speech this morning where he talks about those goalposts. He says that Labor has no mandate to tax and spend Australia’s retirement savings. It’s right. You didn’t take this to the election, this specific policy. So is Angus Taylor right and is Hollie right in terms of you shifting the goalposts here?
ASSISTANT MINISTER: Firstly, in terms of what Hollie said, we’re not proposing major changes to superannuation. I don’t agree with what Angus Taylor has said. These aren’t major changes, they’re delivering on election commitment. We promised before the last election we would review and consult with the Australian people about the purpose of superannuation…
STEFANOVIC: [interjecting]Not specifically this policy, though you didn’t promise that.
ASSISTANT MINISTER: But this is part of that review. Looking at sustainability, one of the four discussion paper questions, and I encourage Australians to have a look at the discussion paper that’s on the Treasury website and have your say is about sustainability. And we’re asking the Australian people whether or not they believe the current generous tax concessions that exist for high income earners are sustainable into the future. Now, we haven’t made a decision on that yet. We’re asking the views of the Australian people and that’s what a good government should do. Ask the views of the Australian people, make a decision, then bring legislation into the Parliament, have it debated, have a parliamentary review and then make a decision.
STEFANOVIC: Was the Prime Minister, and just here with you again, Matt, was the Prime Minister and the Treasurer being cute with words during the election campaign by saying there’s not going to be major changes like you’re saying here. It’s only going to be minor changes. It’s a broken promise, isn’t it?
ASSISTANT MINISTER: No, I don’t see it that way at all, Pete. We said that there wouldn’t be major changes to superannuation and there won’t be major changes to superannuation. What we’re looking at is ensuring that we legislate a purpose for superannuation, as we promised. And in part of that, you’re looking at the sustainability. I tell you what would be a major change to superannuation. If you allowed people to go into their savings to purchase a home, that would be a substantial change to the superannuation system as we know it in Australia.
STEFANOVIC: But people have done that.
ASSISTANT MINISTER: Only in emergency circumstances and that was occurring during the pandemic. But now that we’ve got the data from the release of superannuation from the pandemic, we saw, unfortunately, that some people were able to basically take out their superannuation balances when they didn’t need to.
STEFANOVIC: Just a final one here with you. Back to you, Hollie. I mean, is Labor opening up a class war here?
HUGHES: It’s completely class warfare. And just to correct, Matt, on the 31st January last year, Mr Albanese told Neil Mitchell there would be no changes to superannuation. So, it is being cute with words and now saying that we were having a review, and these are minor changes. Mr Albanese went into the election promising no changes. So, this is a complete and utter backflip by the Labor Party. And to just listen to the rhetoric that Matt was just spouting about high income earners and those with large balances, it is absolutely looking at that culture war that Labor just cannot help themselves in trying to ignite.
STEFANOVIC: Matt, Hollie, always appreciate your time. Thank you so much. We’ll talk to you again soon.
ENDS
