National superannuation surfaces again

OPINION: Just when we all thought the issue of National Super was dead and buried, for the time being, Bill English has not only surprised by raising it but by also setting out National’s solution.  I think everyone knows if they read a paper or listen to the radio or watch TV what the broad outline is – raising the entitlement to start at age 67, increased requirements for immigrants, but no other changes and no actual action for 20 years.

I wonder what John Key thinks – probably more concerned about his golf handicap.

The announcement has so many implications it is not funny, and most of them have already been canvased by other commentators.  The basic policy is actually pretty sensible if you are worried about the future affordability of super and I personally have no problem with the concept of raising the age.  I think national are also sensible to avoid means testing.  Several other countries have also already gone down the delayed start track.  However, that is when the questions start.

No action for 20 years?  Giving fair warning is good politics but 20 years?  New Zealand will be a different place in 20 years’ time.

No analysis of the background and implications??  The issue of affordability has been the big stick forcing change but it is too complex an issue to be dismissed without analysis.  It is indeed not that super is unaffordable – it is more a matter of priorities for future spending.  And the issue of how that will be affected by future demographics and work patterns is not simple to figure out.

I am surprised that the issue of people who will find it difficult to work through to 67, eg. those in physically intensive jobs, has been apparently dismissed so quickly.  It does not need a solution now because circumstances are sure to change, but it surely deserves a mention.

But the main issues here are not those relating to super but what the announcement says about Bill English and the National party under his leadership.

In many ways raising the issue was the ‘right’ thing to do, but it was political dynamite to do so and exposed English’s frailties as a politically astute leader.  At this stage, he is not supported by any other political party in his action and you know that politicians such as Winston Peters are going to have a field day at his expense.  I bet there was an interesting discussion around the Cabinet table on the issue.

The real interest now is in what happens next politically.  Given that super has been such a toxic issue in the past, you would have to assume a fall in support for National, even if it is by a small amount.  Even a small fall, if carried through to the election, would make it very difficult for National to form a Government and could create political chaos.

It also raises interesting questions about English’s future intentions and plans.  I think he is in many ways a very “moral” politician and I suspect there are a lot if things he would like to see done while he is Prime Minister – but is it a case of full speed ahead and damn the torpedoes (in the form of a drubbing at the election) or is is a case of carefully calculating how far he can go without alienating the electorate, i.e. is he aiming for another full term as Prime Minister or is he leaving that in the lap of the gods so to speak.  There is also the issue if his vulnerability to a challenge from within the caucus.

Only Bill English really knows the answers to those questions but I think the answers will become evident over the next few months.

Written by Bas

This is another of Bas Walker’s posts on GrownUps.  Please look out for his articles, containing his Beachside Ponderings.