What Tony Abbott will do for you (Part 1): the age pension
I can’t see the mainstream media’s commitment to telling us who to vote for being relaxed until the election is over and they’ve safely delivered victory to Tony Abbott. Like me, you’ve probably noticed that they’ve offered not one piece of reasoning as to why we should vote for Abbott. Abbott, neither, has told us much as to why he deserves our vote.
But we have gleaned a few things from which we can form our own opinion and more importantly, decide on whether as Prime Minister he is offering a better alternative.
Over the coming months we’ll be looking at what Tony Abbott offers particular demographics and how they will be affected by what we know of his policies or promises. Today we’ll be taking a look a brief look at the Age Pensioners.
The Age Pension first came into operation in 1909 for eligible males aged 65, and the following year it was awarded to eligible females once they reached 60.
In the 2009 Budget the Government announced the Age Pension age was to increase to 67 years of age from 2023. At the time, this was met with howls of protest suggesting that:
The Federal Government is facing a protest from two of the country’s biggest blue-collar unions against its plans to raise the pension age to 67.
The unions say it’s too much to expect workers in physically demanding industries to stretch their working lives by another two years.
Little known is that the Howard Government legislated for the pension age for women to increase from 60 to 65, incrementally, until 2017.
Those protesters who were outraged at the age increases announced in the 2009 Budget will find no sympathy from Tony Abbott. He belonged to a Government that lifted the female age by five years and has publicly announced that he wants it raised to age 70 or above, for both males and females. Among the controversial policy measures in the book Battlelines is a proposal for the pension age to be at least 70.
So if you want the likelihood of an increase in the Age Pension eligibility age then Tony Abbott will welcome your vote.
But what if you are already an Age Pension recipient? How will you be affected if Abbott wins power? We know a little bit, but enough to let you know how it will hit your hip pocket.
Let’s start with the ‘carbon tax’ return:
. . . from March 20, pensioners will start receiving carbon tax compensation each fortnight. Singles will receive $13.50 a fortnight while couples will receive $20.40.
Ms Macklin said the government was delivering $1 billion a year to pensioners across the country through the carbon tax compensation package.
”In contrast, Tony Abbott and the Liberals have promised to claw back the $1 billion a year support Labor is delivering pensioners,” she said.
”This means every single pensioner in Australia would lose more than $350 a year and every pensioner couple would lose more than $530 a year under an Abbott government.”
Say goodbye to this under an Abbott Government.
How will a vote for Tony Abbott affect your superannuation if you are an age pensioner? That’s also an easy one to answer:
Superannuation has emerged as an election issue, after Opposition leader Tony Abbott confirmed plans to axe a super tax break worth up to $500 a year for 3.6 million low-income earners.
Mr Abbott yesterday pledged there would be “no unexpected changes that are detrimental to people’s superannuation” if he becomes prime minister, but he confirmed a previous announcement that a Coalition government would axe $1 billion a year in super concessions for low-income earners, funded by the mining tax the Coalition also plans to scrap.
That’s another $500 a year age pensioners can say goodbye to.
And neither does he offer any inspiration for those approaching retirement age who face the prospects of not being self-funded retirees.
I would welcome your comments.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
90 commentsLogin here Register here
Heaven help us if the LNP are elected federally in September! People need only look at the actions of this Party in Queensland & Victoria with regards to funding cuts and mass sackings in the Health Sector.
If people working are accumulating superannuation (thank you Labor, your welcome economy) remuneration for when they are pensioners and they lose $500 a year, when they retire and are “pensioners” they ill not see that money. I will add that had Howard (the worst treasurer in Australian political history) would have increased the compulsory rate from 9 to 15% people, and the country would have been far better off
My wife and I became pensioners under circumstances we never expected. Please feel free to consult me on this most generous social benefit if you need a real pensioners point of view.
on your two points
Firstly the carbon tax compo, well its compensation for the effects a tax regime that is going to be abolished if we have a change of government so why would we need to continue compensating for the carbon tax once it is gone?
Your second citation will probably have no effect on pensioners at all because it only effects those who are in work and accumulating their superannuation rather than those who are already retired and collecting the aged pension.
Sorry to tell you but that is two wrong in Part one 😉
It is a Carbon Levy, you cannot trade a tax.
Well not quite.
Firstly, pensioners will be OVER compensated for the effects of the price on carbon and secondly, as many conveniently fail to mention, there is NO compensation for the ‘direct action plan’ slated to replace the price on carbon and cost around $1300 per year per person.
Worst case scenario for pensioners is now $2150 a year worse off under Abbott !!!
I’m definitely in lockstep with you John Lord. We also found ourselves on the full pension due to a situation beyond our control.
We just thank heaven for the recent increases in our pensions and like many other pensioners, would be more than a little upset if TA were to get into power and dismantle the ‘mining tax’.
Still don’t know what you are trying to prove Ian. If you want us to go back to the years of Howardism, go chase yourself. The LNP never did anything for anyone in the lower income bracket especially the pensioners.
Sandra, as a former public servant who worked in the policy area for pensions or income support payments I can categorically state that Howard cared not one iota for the poor buggers on those payments.
And guess who the minister was at the time. Tony Abbott.
Heaven help us if Tony Abbott is elected. Iain Hall is wrong on both counts there. Firstly, if the unthinkable occurs, the Carbon Pricing Scheme would go, only to be replaced by a more expensive scheme for which no compensation will be paid. Secondly, the price of items affected under the Pricing Scheme is unlikely to drop, should the price be abolished. It is clear that the economically incompetent Abbott does not believe the science behind climate change and has an agenda geared towards the major polluters. Another thing for people to consider is some rental car companies have a carbon offset programme and contribution to this is, guess what, voluntary, so the cost of renting a car for a day doesn’t require a bank loan.
Are you serious (my bad silly question) Labor introduced a pay rise to all pensioners (that is aside from the compensation mentioned here). How many years were LNP in, with huge surpluses, and no help to anyone let alone pensioners.
Governments are not businesses and do not need to generate surplusses, although a small one would be nice.
Like I have noted before, a deficit is like having a mortgage, car loan etc. If you can afford to pay it back and we most certainly can at the moment then do it. especially if it benefits the Countries inhabitants.
can you trade anything at present?
That makes it a tax in every practical sense.
I too think that the rise in the aged pension was both needed and long overdue but I am far too cynical to believe that Labor have any more compassion for pensioners than the Liberals do. Both look upon such rises as the price of getting more votes from the older demographic.
You are not alone in your dislike of the opposition scheme to address climate change, I have said for ages that doing nothing at all is preferable to their scheme, but as doing nothing is not an option on the table here I take some small comfort from the potential benefits to our agricultural soils and the proposed tree plantings. Its a case of the Coalition scheme being the lesser of two evils on offer here.
Neither side of politics are paragons of virtue and compassion on this score I wish it were not so but I can’t change it.
The lesser of two evils………. seriously !!!
Please feel free to share any scientifically backed information that actually supports Abbott’s scheme.
Reality check……….. the so-called direct action plan is expensive, it’s counter productive, it’s out of step with the rest of the world, there’s no compensation for pensioners or anyone else except polluters and in terms of reducing emissions it has overwhelmingly been declared as wishful thinking at best.
No, of course we wouldn’t want facts to get in the way of rhetoric and pipe dreams now would we ???
Here’s what we do know:
In Australia, we have already observed an 8.6% measured reduction in emissions since the introduction of the price on carbon. Contrary to your statement, that is both something and measurable.
I’m not even going to bother with the rest of your comment as it is nothing more than pure speculation. If that’s your opinion then fine but let’s not pretend for a second that there is any validity to it. As the old saying goes “Put up or shut up”.
Again, are you serious? AAA rating (3 of them actually) to me suggests not
”Abbott, neither, has told us much as to why he deserves our vote.”
The old political maxim is – “Oppositions don’t win elections, governments lose them.”
That rings true now maybe more than at any time in my memory. Few are warming to Abbott, but people have turned on this government, and it isn’t much use complaining about the media.
There are just too many reasonable grounds to support the public sentiment – that the government has legitimately breached the trust of the electorate.
Who the hell is this Iain Hall person who keeps inflicting his opinions on us all? Is he some kind of expert or just a Tony Abbott sycophant? New here so need/would like to know……..
??? Climate change, I would have thought, is different to the environment. There are also environment initiatives going on, as I understand. Murry darling etc.
WTF are you on about.
and yes I suppose climate change does affect the environment but they are two separate programs.
Some articles for you to read Hall, you might learn something, as for being the lesser of two evils. Why don’t you put up some links to prove your point.
Do some reading Hall, you might learn, this is what has been said about direct action
Gillard’s scheme does absolutely nothing for the environment and its effect on the climate will be unmeasurable, so please don’t complain about the coalition scheme or make plaintiff calls for “scientifically backed information”.
As I suggested both schemes have little to offer the country by way of benefits but the coalition has just a tiny bit more possible benefit to the environment. Its not much but it is there.
This is what the Climate Spectator says about Direct action Policy
Who’s in charge of Coalition climate policy?
the problem for your analogy is that a Labor deficit is like a mortgage with Fanny May and the other dodgy lenders who precipitated the GFC…
Keep reading Geoff and you will work it out
Well he is no expert
I do Hall, One is you, the other is the LNP policy on climate change that is going to cost us $1,300.00 per year without Compensation.
By the way where are those links to say that the LNP policy is the better of two evils.
Gillard’s scheme does absolutely nothing for the environment
The facts disagree with you … again.
The first six months of the carbon tax saw a sharp decline in carbon emissions from the electricity sector,
yes I’m serious in my choice of metaphor that you are taking literally
“Climate change” is ALL about the environment I don’t know how you can think otherwise.
what is it with you and posting irrelevant links?
My argument is that “addressing” climate change is pointless and that the best approach has to be adapting if and when there actually are any challenges as a result from the climate changing. All policy on this mater from both sides of politics is just empty window dressing. Both the Carbon tax from Labor and the direct action scheme form the coalition are duds, its just that the Labor option is worse and a cover for some social engineering and wealth redistribution.
Paul you don’t understand what the lesser of two evils are do you?
that the government has legitimately breached the trust of the electorate.
What, by not holding to its word with Wilkie?
Gillard tried to address each and every concern about alleged ‘lies’ raised here with Ben Fordham, but he wasn’t interested. He, like you, just states that she is a liar, and then moves on to the point of how she copes with that.
It’s truly pathetic
Robert Oakeshott MP @OakeyMP
@chriskkenny Chris, I am still waiting….ATO tax list….find “carbon tax”….I’ll eat your column if you can…..
Expand Reply Retweeted Favorited More
5 mins David @davidlen2
@OakeyMP @chriskkenny Rob thats the last you will hear from that plonker on the subject.. you have delivered the KO punch to the imbecile
Here is a link to pension increases since 1909 to 20/09/2012.
If you look you will notice that under the ALP, pension have increased by nearly $7000, and that in around 5 years, under Howard pension increases were around $5000. for 12 years, so who looks after pensioners better.
Hall, they are only irrelevant to you because you do not believe in climate change, and you said that the LNP Direct action Policy is the lesser of two evils, If you do not believe in Climate change, why say that.
Care to back that up with some facts.
I agree with you Buff McMenis, I am a carer, and the extra money from the Government is a blessing, as you can see from the link I posted, the Howard Government did nothing, around 7000 from the ALP in just five years.
What is the Matter Hall, Are you saying that is not who I am or what I do, or is it the link that proves The Howard Government did nothing for pensioners.
OMG Iain, are you for real or just a pesky Troll ???
Miglo, can you please drop Iain Hall and his argumentative drivel! It’s so annoying when I come to your Blog and find it usurped by Iain with his Right-Wing rants!
Now, to get to the nub of this reply .. I’m with John Lord! As an Age Pensioner and prior to that a Disability Support Pensioner, I have seen my Pension (actually the same for both except now I get Ambulance free of charge) go from a pittance to an amount that, whilst not flush by any means, can be lived on providing one is careful. In all the 12 miserable years of the Howard Government I kept hoping I could share some of the most profitable period in our history, but no .. I didn’t get a brass razoo. Thank you, Labor Party .. I don’t give a damn your reason for it but I appreciate the help you have given me by increasing the Pension, allowing more flexibility re other income, and increased side benefits like a special Allowance for Thermo-regulatory use of electricity. Sitting in a wheelchair 12 hours a day in a heat-wave is no fun without an air-conditioner!
Effect on the climate from that claimed reduction is how many degrees C of cooling?
Oh that’s right no matter how much we reduce emissions China and India more than make up for it.
that is going straight to the pool room!
This is what cares do for the country, saving the government billions of Dollars.
I know, he is only doing to get a rise out of me, but it is not working, I’ll just come back at him with the facts that he cannot refute.
everyone knows what he is,
Hall, stick to the topic, what has the liberal party ever done to help pensioners, carers and disabled in this country, it has been the ALP to do all the hard work in this area.
For the record, I am also a disabled person..moderate conductive bilateral hearing loss, plus rheumatoid arthritis, mostly and thankfully now in remission.
I worked in income support policy for the Howard, Rudd and Gillard Governments. I can tell you, Iain, that Howard did the least for those unfortunate Australians. He cared for them not one little bit.
When Rudd came to power and tried to introduce new measures they were blocked by the Opposition. It was disgusting politics. The Opposition just wanted to play politics. When the Government tried to pass legislation that would help the community the Opposition would block it, purely because they didn’t want the Government to introduce programs that would make them more popular. The other disappointing thing was that the continual blocking of legislation was wasting millions upon millions of the tax payer’s dollars. Then the Opposition would complain that the Government was doing nothing. Truly pathetic.
It was Gillard who introduced policies that recognised the role of carers in this country. And let me tell you that the Opposition did its best to try and block that too.
Paul, that comment of Iain’s was disgracefull and disrespectful. It was a personal insult in my opinion.
Hall, I am not the only person to say that about you, and from what I understand your children go to school and you are capable of working part time while they are at school.
I just find it rather ironic that Paul has been so full of scorn for me because I am a stay at home dad/house husband when he has a less than conventional domestic situation himself.
Didn’t Rudd have a substantial majority in the house? Why blame the opposition rather than the Greens and other minority players for his inability to pass any legislation?
But as it happens I have no issue with carers in general, the greatest respect for most of them in fact.
I think it is odd indeed that people are automatically entitled to the pension before they’re 70.
I think they can have welfare if they’re incapable of working, or if they’re unemployed. But simply handing cash out to able bodied men and women who are likely to live for another 20 years is odd and wasteful.
Maybe 40 years ago 65 was regarded as old, now it’s regarded as mature, the latter stages of middle aged. It isn’t pension age.
What a strange and pathetic little character – 730
Now what was that you were saying about losing the argument as soon as you reverted to personal attacks Tom ???
Oh…it doesn’t matter with 730. He doesn’t ever mount an argument, so it can’t be lost.
Mr-Rabbit really proved he was a zombie for me when he said he will reverse the 20K, back to 6K taxable, and would keep with his `platinum` child-care package.
” I think it is odd indeed that people are automatically entitled to the pension before they’re 70. “
and as a teabag, you would. Even as the better paid jobs get shipped off-shore, only to be replaced with low-paid, temp, casual or other shit-job, that 457s will do.
It is fascinating the way a policy can apparently be summed up in 13 word, inclusive of 1 x ‘Mr Rabbit’ and 2 x ‘teabags’
So, with a mining tax raising 10% of its forecast, a carbon tax that is too high by international standards, an aging population, ever increasing demands on the health sector…
Why is it such a great idea to have able bodied men and women opting out of the workforce to take the pension?
Teabags always miss the point. What IS TRULY WASTEFUL and stupid is sending jobs off-shore, GIFTING the value-add to goods and free access to our once rich market to FOREIGN business for FREE.
We are seeing a trend in Europe and the USA where people of ‘age pension’ retirement age choose to keep working. There are three reasons for this; the like their job, they likes the benefits of employment (both intrinsic and extrinsic) and they might consider themselves of good health thus capable of many years productivity.
It’s fine if you have good health and enjoyable employment. I guess if you have neither, you can choose to retire at whatever age.
Personally, I wouldn’t want to retire too late. Who wants to work until they die?
Personally, I believe the inconsistent moderation is probably because Miglo is only concerned about comments that people actually read.
No one reads Jason’s comments, and I think Miglo therefore presumes no one is likely to take offence. Similar standards are applied to those of 730.
” able bodied men and women opting out of the workforce”
Only teabags see it as ““opting““ Go find us an example of a factory being off-shored at the ““opting““ of the workers. The reality is there is less “living“ jobs and more “shit-jobs“
“It is fascinating the way a policy can apparently be summed up in 13 word, inclusive of 1 x ‘Mr Rabbit’ and 2 x ‘teabags’
Sadly, that’s the state of political discourse on the blogs these days…
” Miglo is only concerned about comments that people actually read.”
its a pretty sure bet that a couple of `accountants` and a couple of Teabags read mine. But l rarely swear and never call the gays or girls the word yomm tries to imply.
” We are seeing a trend in Europe and the USA where people of ‘age pension’ retirement age choose to keep working.”
but none of them MUST keep working to stay out of poverty.? Feed Them-selves.?
The posts start with “teabag” with the 3rd word being another “teabag” and the 5th & 6th being “Mr Rabbit”… by the 7th word, sound judgment suggests that there is unlikely to be anything of interest or insight.
So if there happens to be an unpleasant comment, moderation is unnecessary – no one bothers to get that far.
“Reb, I’m removing your last sentence.”
That’s ok Migs… Beides I can’t quite remember what I wrote anyway…:)
MInd you, it hasn’t escaped my attention that when “Jason” called me “a bitch” you were quite happy to have that published on the blog for all to see.
It’s quite apparent that as far as your “moderation” goes you’re quite comfortable to let abusive comments remain published as long as they’re targeting what’s perceived to be “right wing commentators” while nasty and vile comments from the pro-Labor team are just allowed to be published unchecked.
The recent example of “Jason” calling me a “bitch” is a prime example.
If I had called CU a “bitch” you’ be issuing requests that I must retract it, but when the “bitch” remark is targeting someone who’s politics you’re not aligned with, you’re quite happy to let that remark go published in the public arena.
” It is fascinating the way a policy can apparently be summed up in 13 word, inclusive of 1 x ‘Mr Rabbit’ and 2 x ‘teabags’ “
Its true yomm. l can point out Mr-Rabbits and/or Teabag followers faults, ignorance or blatant lies rather rapidly. Only Teabags such as yourself scream about `welfare` for 70 year-olds. But corporate `welfare` in the hundreds of million$, Hey, no problem. You HAVE NEVER BLEATED ABOUT THE $800 MILLION WELFARE SENT TO DETROIT AND TOKYO.
comment caught in the spaminator…. (again)
Yes, it was inappropriate for Jason to call you a bitch and he is aware of that. Jason knows he is to refrain from such language and I have accepted his commitment not to do so again.
And as a blog owner you’d know that it’s hard to have your eyes on the blog 24/7. While I was enjoying a documentary on UFOs ( 🙂 ) I missed all the drama here last night and hence was distracted from editing responsibilities. 🙁
I don’t dispute that at all Paul
Sadly, that’s the state of political discourse on the blogs these days…
Yea, we should get back to simply blaming the Government for killing people when others break the law
Strange and pathetic is your idea that people should work till they drop. You can work as long as you want, knock yourself out, why impose your neocon greed upon others that have worked all their life.
Yep that’s where I’m @ Tom Mexican after the 70 year old retirement age comment 🙄
teabag theory on jobs
So Abbott has been running around the country for 3 years on his Big Dummy Spit, and has been telling/frightening everyone that every business in the country will be raising their prices because of the Carbon Price.
He is stripping all the compensation from the Pensioners and low Income earners, because he says that if there is no Carbon Price then they do not need the compensation……
so he should PROMISE that every business that has increased their prices because of the Carbon Price will drop their price rises once he dismantles the Carbon Price.
After all …..in his own words on why the pensioners will not need this compensation….
Well if there is no Carbon Price then there is no need for business to keep their increased prices.
He must promise this. For every business that has increased their prices.
The LNP/ Conservatives are all about punishing the poor and disadvantages for their ‘failure. It is pure social Darwinism.
I am left wondering if Mr. Abbott is elected he is going to claw back $1,000,000.form pensioners and the further claw backs as well till atotal $580 for and more for couples.. Does Mr Abbott plan on giving back the $154,726 to the Prime Minister pay now totaling $495,430 a year I THINK NOT…… If our poly’s kept their hand out of the purse this country would better off economically. DO YOU NOT AGREE. I would nice to know how much of the pie they take each year. Now Mr Abbott and Mr Hockey are aiming to rise the pension age to 70 before they become eligible for the pension but!…. poly’s can retire at any age and receive a pension ( that is mostly their wage on retirement ) We work and pay our taxes for what!!!!!!!!!!!! so the poly’s can ride the gravy train. Leaves everybody in a delymia as to who to vote for Ms Gillard I think not and Abbott you could possibly vote for this man or party so who do you vote for ………..vote independant or any body else and it preference voting, so you are only voting for labor or liberal in the end those two parties made sure of this in the early 1900’s when they made it that there could be two parties that lead this nation. The rich and poly’s get rich and the poor get poorer.
does anybody know what the policy is for any changes to the retirement age. I have emailed Tony Abbott several times but have not got an answer.
Whatshisname has hit it on the head
” if there is no Carbon Price then there is no need for business to keep their increased prices”
Will Abbott give a clear undertaking that ALL businesses, including electricity companies who said 10% of recent rises were due to Carbon Levy, will REDUCE their charges by the levy?.
Quite obviously he wont, for he knows everything will remain at current prices and us pensioners will be $40/week WORSE off under a Liberal Govt.
Its really pathetic to see Lib trolls showing the same disrespect pensioners received during the Howard years. If anyone played the ‘money for votes’ strategy, it was Howard with his ‘baby bonus’ and Family Tax breaks for middle class voters.
This bloke in the UK has got a real great explainer on Teabag-Theory, quite funny and scary if they could get away with it.
If it were lawful for a multinational corporation to make money by breeding people in order to kill them and processing bones from specially bred humans fattened on special diets into expensive products, they would do so. If such a venture were profitable there would be many investors whose money would finance such venture. If the venture was very profitable and brought some poorly paid employment to a section of their governed, the business would be protected by governments and there would be many people (provided that they were not victims or likely to be victims of such ventures) who would be capable of expounding rational and wonderful arguments why such venture should be permitted. There would also be fine rules about corporate governance and spellbinding rhetoric as to the importance of these ventures .. .. .. ..
Desperately Trying to Become a Cuckoo