My comments on super repatriation in today’s Courier-Mail

Pitt_falls

Page 17 of today’s Courier-Mail

I am obviously concerned about the possible risks associated with the State Government’s planned withdrawal of funds set aside to meet defined benefit superannuation liabilities, and I am quoted to this effect in today’s Courier-Mail, following a discussion I had yesterday with the paper’s State Political Editor Steven Wardill. But, as I have stressed to journalists I have spoken to today, we really need to see the full details of the Government’s plans before we can make a final judgment.Based on the State Actuary’s estimates, the Government is around $10 billion ahead in meeting its defined benefit super liability. There may well be a case for repatriating a small portion of this surplus to the Budget, so long as it is used wisely, and so long as there is still a substantial buffer to protect against sharemarket movements and the risk the liability could be greater than estimated by the State Actuary. Until we see the details of how much the Government intends to withdraw and what it intends to do with the money, it is difficult to be more definitive.

My comments reported in today’s Courier-Mail were as follows:

Adept Economics’ Gene Tunny, a former Queensland Treasury official, said while there was scope for some repatriation, the raid could expose the state’s coffers to market fluctuations.

“I would be concerned about that,” he said. “I would prefer that money that is set aside for a particular purpose be used for that purpose.”

For the record, I was a Commonwealth Treasury official, rather than a Queensland Treasury official.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Budget, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to My comments on super repatriation in today’s Courier-Mail

  1. Katrina Drake says:

    You may well be correct Gene, and there may be a ‘buffer’ that is available for re-cycling into infrastructure, and this maybe a better use for the funds.

    But, I have long been concerned about all levels of Government appropriating citizens superannuation savings. This proposition is just another nasty precedent ….

    It is becoming clearer that Superannuation has become one of the biggest rorts ever to be perpetuated on the Australian people.

    Put your life saving into an account that you cannot access until you are 55, make that 60, make that 65, make that 67 , make that ….

    Watch helplessly, while Government continually changes the law relating to superannuation , increases the taxes , reduces contributions caps, delays access ….

    Watch helplessly while everyone else but you withdraws money from your super – advisers, insurance premiums that are expensive and unlikey to be honoured, BRW rich list fund managers, mysterious related parties in the financial accounts, ….

    Don’t be mislead by advertising that says Industry Funds are any better – you only need to read the related party transactions in their financial reports to see the hundreds of millions being siphoned out annually to related parties.

    I agree we would all prefer that our super funds be set aside for our own retirement – alas – this principle was set aside many years ago. No-ones superannuation funds are safe or unaffected.

    Our superannuation system , while originally a well intended good idea, has been sadly lost to governments that cannot manage a budget, and greed from the Industry that grew to manage it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s