Superannuation was claimed as a major initiative for women under Labor when the proportion of women covered rose rapidly to almost all in paid work. However the basic system was flawed and worked best for those in long term high paid employment as they received considerable advantage from taxation concessions.
|1993-96 under Labor||0|
The plan under Labor had a total of 15% of income promised - 9% from employers and 3% each from government and workers. The 3% government was the delayed L.A.W. tax cuts reallocated. Reduced the fees on small sums and made some moves to allow for consolidation of small amounts.
The program did not work for low income and casual workers and they were being left with many small accounts, losing money, or failing to grow because of fee costs. Changes were mainly tidying up, and even government contributions would not compensate for unfairness of proposals.
|1996-98 under the Liberal/National Party Coalition||+3|
Raised the threshold to $900 per month, thus returning some more to low paid and casual workers. However have done nothing to provide a mechanism to allow low paid workers to claim the extra so presumably only the employers have profited. They have taken positive steps to resolve the problem of splitting superannuation at divorce. The surcharge on high income earners super, although it has design problems is a recognition of the inequity of the tax concessions introduced by Labor. Have recognised the needs of independent low income self funded retirees. Putting money in for wives not in employment is neutral as it is only good for high income women and avoids tax.
The Coalition abolished the government contribution and the worker contribution and stated that the total would rest at 9%. See above on failure to allow low income people to reclaim their super if they wanted to.
|Election Promises by Labor||-|
|Election Promises by Liberal/National Party Coalition||-|
Form Guide | Election index | WEL home page
Page created 20 September 1998; last updated 20 September 1998