So I’d like to give the Reserve Bankanother instrument, that’s what I ’d like.Rob Goodlad: I think it’s counterintuitivethat a year ago, it was madeextraordinarily attractive for people toinvest in superannuation when the marketwas at its highest. Well now thatthe market is at its lows, we’re reducingthe amount that goes in, so from aninvestment perspective, it’s the wrongway round.Nicholas Gruen: It alarms mea little bit, this idea that the way wecurrently do things is sacred, and thatwe can’t adjust the 9 per cent no matterwhat.

The difficulty is the industry isgoing to say, we want to adjust the 9 percent, but only up to 12. Government’sin a situation where they’re squeezedand they’re trying to make deals that aremutually beneficial to different objectives.What we were trying to do withthis was basically say, here’s somethingthat had a short term impact, that meetsGovernment needs, and has a long termimpact that meets the nation’s needs.You can sell that politically. Just arguing9 to 12 in my view is not going to get upin the current climate.The super industry doesn’t have anyincentive to say, for example, let’s go 9to 12 and let’s reform the regressivity ofthe taxation treatment of super, becausethat second component of it is actuallya negative for super.

So no one elseis going to play into that space. In theabsence of that, in the absence of a shortterm-long term trade off, then what arewe left with? Even worse for the superindustry, we’ve got a debate about theadequacy of pensions in the retirementincomes review, are they going to pulla bit from super to make sure they’repropping up the pensions?Because we haven’t got a lot ofmoney coming from anywhere else. SoI think the danger of doing nothing asa super industry and putting nothingon the table, a give and take, is that youmight get done over.Colin Tate: Rob, what was theresponse to your porposal from Kevin Rudd, whom you know well?Rod Glover: I’d prefer not to talkabout the direct response from the individuals.Basically we spoke to the PM,we spoke to the Treasurer’s office, wespoke to Nick.

But what I would saythere is no way in the world that there isa universal view within the governmentabout what should happen in superannuation.Trevor Thompson: I wouldn’tdiscount lightly the potential damageof moving backwards to say 6 per centat this point. It is unbelievably naïveto think that it can be jumped fromthere up to 12 per cent in any reasonableperiod of time – just sit and try tocontemplate the process you’ve got togo through to make that happen, andconsider the history. I just can’t see howthat can be done.Tony Harris: The interesting thingabout making statements in the longterm is how easily digestible they areby the population. I mean we’ve movedwomen’s eligibility for the aged pensionfrom 60 to 65 years, that’s a huge disadvantageto women.

Join the discussion