Politicians need to enter the real world
ACCORDING to Greens leader Christine Milne, “Superannuation in Australia has become a tax haven for the wealthy.”
Yet as far as most Australians can see, there is only one guaranteed, rolled-gold tax haven in the whole country. It’s called Parliament House, where a fortunate group of people are set to receive millions of dollars in tax for many years courtesy of hardworking wage earners.
The debate over superannuation must be viewed in light of the ¬generous superannuation structure for federal politicians.
Department of Finance figures confirm $44.6 million is drained from taxpayers every year to fund the Parliamentary Contributory Superannuation Act. Frontbenchers who were elected prior to 2004, when legislation was changed, are especially well-off. On retirement, they can expect superannuation amounts up to $200,000 per year.
Former Labor leader Mark Latham drove those superannuation changes from opposition.
“I put an idea forward two days ago, it’s going to become the law and I think that’s a tremendous thing for our Australian democracy,” he said at the time. Then he resigned and now receives the massive entitlements he opposed.
Federal politicians sometimes wonder why they are perceived as out of touch. In the case of superannuation, the lack of connection between politicians from all parties to the genuine needs of Australians could not be more apparent.
Many politicians — including Treasurer Joe Hockey — are independently wealthy, to a degree unimaginable to average Aussies. Yet Hockey, too, will receive a substantial taxpayer gift when he retires.
Meanwhile, with each episode of tinkering and adjusting to superannuation, citizens lose confidence that the system is either fair or sustainable. One thing is for sure: they would much rather their futures be determined by representatives who are, well, more representative.
One way to accomplish this would be to remove Parliament’s tax haven status.
