Superannuation Guarantee

Ms HILDYARD (Reynell) (15:43): I rise to speak about an issue that will negatively impact hundreds of thousands of ordinary South Australians. Two weeks ago, Tony Abbott's federal Liberal government reached into the pockets of thousands of Australians and ripped the heart out of the income that would have ensured that they were able to access a decent, secure and dignified retirement.

The freezing of the superannuation guarantee at 9.5 per cent per annum until at least 2021 will reduce the retirement income of more than eight million Australians. This is despite Tony Abbott's pre-election promise of no adverse changes to superannuation. The member for Sturt, the federal education minister, Christopher Pyne, had the gall to say, on 2 September, in relation to this substantial change, that this decision is very good news for workers.

Good news perhaps if you are a highly-paid worker who will maintain a 30 per cent tax concession on your super. Not good news, however, if you are amongst our lowest paid workers, who will be penalised for saving for their retirement and not good news for female workers, who already lag behind men in terms of retirement savings, due to a growing gender pay gap, the fact that they are more likely than men to take time away from work to care for children and others and the fact that currently they are expected, on average, to live longer than men.

With the retirement income of half of Australia's female workforce now cut and the abolition of the low income superannuation contribution, which benefits 2.2 million Australian women, the federal Abbott government has shown its lack of care for the ability of women to enjoy a dignified retirement. Saving the low income superannuation contribution was a top priority for many groups, including the Women in Super group, who state that without it about one in two working women and 80 per cent of the female part-time workforce will incur a tax penalty for saving for their retirement.

Increasing the superannuation guarantee from 9 per cent to 12 per cent on the original timetable would have delivered financial security for hundreds of thousands of workers, begun to address the responsibilities that come with an ageing population, and supported our economy. Instead of keeping its pre-election promise to ensure no adverse changes to superannuation and instead of caring about the future of Australian workers, this federal Abbott Liberal government has supported tax reductions for just our wealthiest Australians.

There has been much debate, in light of this broken promise, about the interaction between enterprise agreements and the superannuation guarantee. The wages and conditions of more than four million Australian workers are covered by enterprise agreements and many of those agreements simply refer or default to superannuation guarantee provisions. The reality is that when many workers bargained in good faith with their employer to reach those agreements they did so with the reassurance of a promise by the incoming Prime Minister that the previously legislated timetable of increases to the guarantee would remain, meaning they did not need to put any new provisions in their agreements. But, to their detriment, that promise has been broken.

I have no doubt that unions and some employers will work hard together to vary some agreements to ensure that terms and conditions reflect the original guarantee or to adjust wages to take into account the Prime Minister's broken promise. I also have no doubt that, amongst the rhetoric we have heard from the federal Liberal government, we have not heard, nor will we hear, about the impact this broken promise will have on the hundreds of thousands of workers relying on award wages—in hospitality, retail, the community sector and undertaking clerical work—who do not currently have an opportunity to negotiate into an agreement improvements to address the shortfall in their retirement savings. We will not hear because they do not care. In fact, the retirement savings of low to middle income earners are not enough for them. They are now coming after their penalty rates, too.

But we should not be surprised. The Liberal Party has always opposed universal superannuation, as they have opposed other mechanisms which promote fairness and equal access to a decent standard of living. The federal Liberal government talks about ending the age of entitlement.

Mr Pengilly interjecting:

Ms HILDYARD: However, as Australians find that their superannuation savings are not enough to live on, they will need to supplement their savings with a pension. This federal government decision is an outrageous one, made by a government that fundamentally fails to understand what it means to live on a basic wage and how any cuts to universal superannuation put at risk the possibility of a dignified and secure retirement for so many ordinary working Australians.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Before we continue, I just need to remind the member for Finniss that he has several ticks and crosses beside his name from question time, so any more outbursts and I will have to put another tick beside his name.