The greedy believed the lies from this government in the election campaign. Plenty of money for tax cuts for the wealthy though. No worries.
People who voted this cartel back in should truly enjoy what they about to receive. This is bit the start. Next cab possibly putting the family home in the assets test. Have to fund tax cuts somehow you know!

Anne Rushton another post turtle

Liveitup the government didn't say amything, mo policy statements all the did was rubish labor and their honesty. LNP are not good managers as we are now seeing.

LNP are great managers as seen by the increased surplus over the budget.

Agree with you Mick....We'll just get rid of this mob at the next election....forever...

Thanks for the laugh LiveItUp. Surplus? Iron ore went up significantly and the government trolls claim the budget is in surplus. IT ISN'T. Wait for more lies when the next says of figures come in. It'll be Labor's fault. The it'll be the Greens. Then it'll be the world economy. The excuses will never end. That's what liars do. This government is on the top of the lying list.
I look forward to the next set of accounts. Maybe iron ore (=the private sector) will work. Unfortunately the government has now given tax cuts and somebody will have to pay.

Couldn't agree with you more Mick, this is just the start from a morally and policy bankrupt cartel. Don't blame me I didn't vote for their lies and scaremongering.

Yeah. Guess hiw much her pension will be worth when she retires. On top of that, she wont have to worry about meeting a retirement age, an income test, an asset test, her family home being assessed as an asset and she wont even have to worry about super changes?
Why not? Because pensions are for peasants, not for royalty, i.e. politicians. They are the untouchable, privileged, high class who decide what's good x us the tax-paying peasants of this Australia Fair of ours!!!

Agree Blinky. Pollies enjoy obscene exorbitant salaries and all the perks we know about ! Cos they can!! They are the biggest drain on the taxpayer !!

they are all blood suckers and descendants criminals who were dumped here and mercilessly massacred the innocent living beings peacefully living here.

they are all blood suckers and descendants criminals who were dumped here and mercilessly massacred the innocent living beings peacefully living here.

retired lady, that's not her problem that's why she doesn't care.

Politicians, , ALL OF THEM
do not care about pensioners, they see them as a burden to the budget.
BUT, they DO REMEMBER that THEIR pensions are not 9nlt good, but that they will be there whether the budget is balanced or not!!!,

Don't forget the Champagne socialist shifty shorten was the highest spender last year, $3 million plus. H really cares about pensioners doesn't he, sheesh.

Well said Aussie Tuca

Absolutely correct, AussieTuca, this Minister is clearly still wet behind the ears, and let out a secret which the Libs are meant to share between themselves. Not smart enough to trick us yet! I did hear she was previously an adviser in AustralianSuper - wonder what kind of advice they got from her?

If she is concerned too much money is spent on social welfare, I guess she can start by going for Universal Age Pension with NO tests, and only based on Age (65 years) and Residency (say 15 years), paid directly by the ATO, and cut down expenses in a massive way by shutting down a major part of Centrelink. Secondly, they can scrap all special politicians pensions, past and present, such as over $300K for Abbott, over $250K for Bronnie Bishop, Ruddock, etc, etc.

AussieTuca wondered "Where did you learn Economy? " ... Uni of Southern Queensland

https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Parliamentarian?MPID=243273

I think she is related to LiveItUp

Reading her comments throughout this subject perhaps Liveitoup's real name is Anne Ruston. Incidentally this morning I read about the daughter of ex-PM challenging his will worth $millions. Just another poor Polly???

yes Dennis this is the crux of the matter, most and that includes me receive no benefit from these changes, though I have no reserves I am lucky to receive a little extra and only have apart pension, there is no way anybody can live on the basic pension only, utility and all the costs of surviving in a modern world take that without talking about food and warmth.

That message needs to be got out there so the young can stop spending and save for their old age. Yes it will collapse the economy. There are always consequences. The LNP has one policy. Stop Labor. They are giving themselves more income with the tax cuts. That's all it's about.

I'm afraid they have all forgotten that they work for us. They only see politics as a means to become rich. We seam to be making a lot of rich politicians. None of them are qualified to hold any portfolio. They pay mega dollars to people to tell them what to do. They don't even consult us when they sell our assets!

Yes, they work for us, but sadly, according to their contract we must wait three years until the next election to sack them.

I spent 62 years in the full time work force, accumulated a few dollars and get a part pension.
We need a universal pension payable to all residents over pension age and cut the perks to pollies and public servants. That would save billions.If they want more,they can save for it the same as the rest of us.

I second that Ahjay. A brilliant solution

Yes Hawke and Keating stole the OAOP that pensioners saved through their taxes and then had the hide to say "It was a recession that we had to have" when interest rates for a housing loan rose to 18%. Then Under Gillard we got the highest paid Politicians in the Western World..... that is where our money went.

Sure it was Fraser who took off with the Welfare Fund.

The Liberal Party was created to stop Labor governing. They have no other policies and so often need to sell our assets or take our money to fund themselves. It's really that simple.

Lynch and Fraser transferred the balance from the welfare fund but it had already been dead in the water for more than two decades. Some suggest the fund was originally a ruse to raise more income in the aftermath of WW2 because it was never set up correctly to track contributions and payments. Over the years the fund evolved into a complex accounting exercise that prompted Menzies to streamline the process by amalgamating the levy into the tax tables in 1962. There is no evidence the 7.5% levy even continued beyond the subsequent review of the tax tables. It would be interesting to comb the archives to see if there is any mention in the cabinet or treasury papers to see the extent to which it featured in later decisions.

Which just proves you can't trust anything politicians say or do.

Rae, we have always known deep down that pollies were loose with truth and ethically flexible when it came to commitments, however it is not an excuse for naivety and wilful misunderstanding when we think they are doing something to benefit us. Political misrepresentations over the years together with lack of scrutiny and general absence of civics education has not done us any favours.

Intellego, Morrison's mantra, fair go applies if you have a go and if you don’t seek to “take” a contribution.

Those are the LNP policies.

Sure you would. What for a day, a week? What happens when something breaks down or needs replacing. Where are the cash reserves? We’re savers and live on a budget but can honestly say that we would struggle on the OAP. You must be a troll

My response was to LiveitUp whose comments on being able to live on the OAP seem to have been removed.

Yes it looks like if you disagree with anything here your comments get removed. That's not very democratic at all.

Intellego,there are plenty of ALP vermin, shifty shorten, the bill we cannot afford for a start.

Well... LIU/OG - when you post garbage.. it just gets taken out.....

You did, and look what it got you. Surely as an oldie you must have learnt some discernment, some ability to identify shonks, yet you voted for the most obvious collection of scam artists and self-interested liars who ever presented themselves for election. I suppose you subscribe to the Murdoch press. You didn't want to vote for Shorten because you didn't trust him or something; did you ever consider his policies? Did you believe the government's lies about the retirement tax and so on? Sorry, Tex, but you reap what you sow.

All very well, and true to a point Albert, but WE reap what they sow as well.

So much for the failing system we call democracy, where populism outweighs policy.

Bring on the beneficent dictator! All we need to do is find one...

Shorten lies, he lies -- what BULLSHIT. Retirement tax - now that was a lie. I don't think I've heard a true statement from the liberals yet. No one seams to remember Abbots string of lies and broken promises and Howard's "NON CORE PROMISES". However, Shorten could have come out fighting instead of playing the cool calm and collected strategy.

Rumour has it that shifty is organising a chain of 2nd hand car dealers, he will be ACE at that.

Go away, roy - the greatest danger to parliament is democracy...

Shorten has no need for a used car chain..... (chees)...

How do you know they voted for Scott Morrison? Because he got in doesn't mean pensioners specifically voted for him. It was probably all those highly paid workers who knew they'd get the benefits that pensioners wouldn't who voted for them. I certainly didn't vote for him and I'm a pensioner so don't tell us to suck it up because we voted for him.

It could have been quite different if labour had come up with rational run of the mill policies we wouldn't have this self-indulgent lot back in power and for the record I voted for neither of the major parties

Buggsie, I didn't vote for the LNP either and so far have not met anyone who admits to having voted for them.
I think the LNP were probably re-elected by preferences which a lot of folk filled in, although I did hear the LNP had the most primary votes in the election.
It is still a mystery to me why anyone would vote for either liberal or labor.

Who, in his/her right mind - would vote for Morrison for President?

Well said Bugsie, agree entirely - save it for the next election, but the people who listened to the LNP lies will probably fall for them again in the next election - they are extremely gullible. I also feel that the piddly Newstart payment is an outrageous blight on this country's government. When they can afford to give the top echelon such a huge tax break, why can't they give the most vulnerable in our society a mere $100 a week. It is an utter disgrace, we have approx. 130,000 homeless people in Australia at the moment -to coin a phrase - "how good is Australia?"

libsareliars asks "how good is Australia?", one answer came from Ruston's colleague, Community Housing Minister, Luke Howarth, when said it was important to “put a positive spin” on homelessness. He said “What I’m saying ... is that Australia, we live in a fantastic country" and "We have 99.5% of our Australians … homed and living in safe places. There’s half a per cent of the population that isn’t." - sucks to be them I guess. He said the nearly 14% increase in homelessness between the 2011 and 2016 census surveys was “not ahead of population growth” and the a drop in the raw numbers of people rough sleeping from 8,946 to 8,200 was "good news".

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jul/09/community-housing-minister-luke-howarth-wants-a-positive-spin-on-homelessness

to clancambo...she is a leaner..a bludger and spiv

You mean it is a generous amount of money that taxpayers make available for our politicians?

Wickedness - and don't forget all the extras she gets...travel allowance, accommodation allowance, meal allowance, stationary allowance (and what she doesn't spend - she can keep), obscenely generous super, post retirement travel, overseas travel, parking allowance, vehicle allowance, electoral allowance, electorate charter allowance, family travel allowance, etc.... And I can guarantee politicians have set up trusts and legal entities to avoid paying any tax.

No, Thoughtful, it is a too generous amount of money that politicians have lifted from the taxpayers...And those same taxpayers will be shafted by those same politicians when they retire.

I want to now how shifty has amassed a personal fortune of $61 million, does anybody know? Champagne socialist what?

It would be wise to cut any extra spending on anything discretionary as this is going to get worse. The States will be screaming for a GST increase next and those tax cuts won't help retirees pay the higher prices for everything.

Rae, I already have cut any extra spending! But i get your point.

Yes the Labor Government reintroduced the assets test in March 1985 however an assets test was a feature of our social security system for most of the century. Did your grandparents omit to inform you there was a means test in place from July 1909 to October 1958? This was followed by a merged means test from May 1961 to May 1975 that applied to income and property.

Unlike the rest of the OECD that realise this sort of inequity isn't very clever. When we all have to save like crazy to pay for our own retirement what happens to Main Street businesses. There is a reason retail and hospitality is contracting. Supply and Demand.

A Liberal Party has one policy. Stop Labor. After that they need good advisers and we know Credlin got rid of them.

Rae, I suspect our government and it's advisers (and even the much loved IPA) realises the inequity isn't desirable for a thriving society but addressing this is simply not its priority. Choices have consequences and we get the governments we deserve, not those we might need.

Exactly

They do only two things. Stop Labor and make money for themselves and mates. Always have done. I'm astonished you haven't realised this before now.

I didn't know we had tories in Australia, enlighten me Sconny.

In Australia, "Tory" is occasionally used as a pejorative term by members of the Australian Labor Party to refer to conservative members of the Liberal Party of Australia and National Party of Australia parties (who are in a long-standing coalition)....different country same politics they don't give a crap about ordinary Aussies...over to you Roy boy

So shifty shorten cares about Australians,not. So shifty is a Tory. Over to you sconny boy.

this is getting to be habit, do I always need to enlighten you Royboy...for your information NONE of them of whatever political persuasion give a stuff about me OR you but take a look at your current hero Roy, the sniggering, sneering Morrison... he least of all of them.. he pisses me off and er...I've read some of your comments on this forum and you're beginning to piss me off to...over and OUT

to bob menzies...bugger the budget..pensioners are entitled (it is not welfare) to a decent and respectable pension payment.. not he pittance they get now...and the Newstart allowance is disgraceful.
This govt is a bunch of liars and the sooner they get kicked out of govt the better..I never voted for them and never will.

balanced comments Bob. I think the Government could do more about pension affordability if it focussed on allocating proportion of GDP to social security roughly in line with OECD average.

That goes for retired politicians as well, bob. They certainly didn’t think about budget when they corruptly awarded themselves lifetime pensions plus perks after working eight years. And, as for living longer, it is quite possible some of them will be fleecing the taxpayers for half a century.

Dear Bob Menzies,
Your namesake was the one who took the pension tax and put it into general revenue!
I suggest you do some simple maths. 7.5% of taxes paid over 50 years and invested at compound interest?? I will take that in lieu of my pension right now.

General comments - Farside there is much merit in your suggestion. Crowcrag - your correct but it was part of a bigger package and since my first degree was finance the maths are very easy for more - while your correct there are other factors with that decision taken nearly 66 years ago. Triss - you will get no arguments from me BUT at least we have Mark lather to thank that no federal politician entering parliament after 2006 will get a life time pension - they contribute and can access after age 60 same as everyone else - however if you come back and say yes but there's is generous you'll only get my support.
Finally Thommo - for you elections must generally be a sad affair - for me from 1950 I was 21 before I experienced a labor govn ( the disastrous Whitlam) and since 1993 the coalition have won 8 and of the 9 elections (yes they won in 2010 and Australians only suffered 3 years of Gillard because 2 disaffected ex Nats voted for her - libs actually won the majority of votes and the people spoke 3 years later and voted those 2 Nats out big time.
I suspect you'll be disappointed in 3 years time when schmo wins again

to bob menzies..that's the trouble...This country needs to be put back on an even keel, so that society is more fairer....ie equitable fairness...not what the LNP deem it to be so..

too true Arjan - I intend to write to the Minister and I suggest you and everyone else who is so inclined, and is outraged, do the same - inundate her mail box with letters expressing our fury and disbelief in her arrogance, and her "out-of-touch" lifestyle.

Not even fit to be a back bencher, they need to march this ignorant out of politics alltogether

Surely that's a decision for the electorate Tood? She's not my local member but I would be very annoyed if the one this electorate chose was to be thrown out at the whim of other people.

Please note people she is a Senator and does not have an electorate. She is in because many voted LNP above the line and not for here personally

Just to be pedantic Veritas, she is a Liberal Senator because she represents South Australia, The only LNP Senators are from Queensland where the Liberals and Nationals have joined together rather than be a coalition as they are elsewhere.

you're joking aren't you Ducky? How could you not know Josh Frydenburg. And where did he come from ... Liberal heartland of Kooyong

Eddy, your objection to the word "welfare" does not change what it is. DSS references include a "fair and sustainable welfare system" and "building personal responsibility to reduce welfare dependency" and its program "Services to the Community – Social Security and Welfare" amongst others. There are numerous welfare references in the budget papers and of course we had the Welfare Reform Act last year. The word is not going away and is not intended to be denigrating or judgemental toward those receiving it.

Farside we know they use doublespeak now. Fair means unfair and surplus means add to the debt. More efficient and cheaper means it's going to cost heaps and won't work and some foreigner is making off with the money from our assets we no longer own.

There is a point where all the lying words dreamed( or deemed) up just don't work anymore and your government has hit that point. They can say what they like but people don't believe them or trust them.

They can tick the boxes and write a million reports and it doesn't mean a thing. They can even pass dodgy legislation. Governments in their last legs often do. Wallets are slamming shut right now all over Oz. They have really blown it this time good and proper. Even the young ones are laughing at them.

Their treasury is empty, their foreign friends think them fools and even their buildings are falling down or burning up.

We are worried about food on the table, roofs over heads and water in the jugs. None of which these honourable seem concerned about as the drought wears on. And fake money is not going to fix it.

yep Rae, "we're from the government and we're here to help" ... and besides all those observations ... "how good is Australia?"

None = you are fortunate to own your own home.....that must help.....try living on the Age Pension as sole income, and paying a mortgage, plus everything else. I'm not sure how much longer I can do it, and at 75 I won't get a job......genersous indeed!

Spot on.

Absolutely correct - well said Seadove.

Make it a year, Geminiwoman.

not going to happen, sorry

I absolutely refuse to believe politicians go into politics "to help people". Utter rubbish! They stand to get in simply and solely for what they can get out of it. I had the misfortune to work for one - briefly, thank heavens. And not for one second, not a single second, did constituents come first. Morally and ethically, I could not tolerate the lies, the absolute false 'advice' I was forced to tell people. Worst job I have ever had in over 50 years.

Hey sunnyOz, Shifty Shorten is in politics for the people and not himself, did you not know?

.... where do you get a place for $250.00 per week rent? Is that one room/share house? Unit in Regional area? Where? I have friends here in Melbourne who are on the OAP and are paying $340.00 per week (no "McMansion" either!)

If it wasn't for one of their kind adult sons helping out with rent now and then - how in hell could they survive on simply the OAP? Impossible!!!

Pensioners in "private rental" are the ones doing it tough - trust me! From what I hear it's about time the Rent Assistance/Supplement is INCREASED!! As is wayyyy behind with the constant increase in rents! Years since an increase - right??

This bloody woman is a joke! Get rid of her! Outrageous and lacking in compassion!!

By the time the next election comes they will have found more lies to spin to the "gullible" pensioners.

That's a tough comment, thommo - "pensioners are now getting their just desserts" - who are you to judge why people are on the pension in the first place? and how do you know which people - pensioners or millionaires - voted in the current government?

Not my just desserts, thommo, I didn't vote for the sods!

to Dancer.. it is quite obvious that a lot of pensioners vote Liberal...thinking they will be fair...but it you had your ear to the ground for the last six years, you would know that they are just a bunch of lying mongrels... Yes a lot of well-off retirees voted for the LNP, but those with franking credits largess were a minority.... so, pensioners should have been awake to Morrison and his lies...But just kick them out next time...

Agree entirely thommo. KICK THIS MOB OUT!

thommo is talking to the half of pensioners that voted LNP (again)

Well said mudGecko!

If you can pay for animals then the OAP is very generous.

Livitup - what a spoil sport you are! It is an absolute proven fact that seniors with a pet are happier, often healthier, and live longer! I recently helped a 92 year old lady still living in her own home, to get a little dog. After her last dog died, she swore she would "shrivel up and die". I have a little dog, who costs me less than $5 a week, and boy, does she eat well! I go to a local supermarket on a Monday morning and buy legs of lamb reduced from $38.50 to $4.25. That feeds her for 2 weeks. Plus the bone. Never needed a vet apart from $120 for annual vaccinations, we walk twice a day, meet and talk to people down the park, at cafes, in my little town. In my area some of the older people admit that having their dog is the best way to maintain socializing. And none of these people have big dogs, which makes it cheaper. So that is totally wrong, unfair and insulting to say if you are on the pension, and have a pet, you are living in luxury.

......sunnyOz - legs of Lamb reduced from $38.50 - to $4.25? Seriously? You obviously don't live in "Marvellous Melbourne" haha .....(once - the world's most liveable city...)

legs of lamb still "gold plated" here on any day of the week! :(

Pets are a luxury so if you can afford a pet on the OAP then it is very generous.

Agreed. Pets are wonderful as companions and give a real reason for many people to enjoy their quieter years. Don't knock them. These folks don't sound as warped and nasty as the nay-sayers commenting. Pets are not a luxury. If anything they can be a necessity and are so worth having.

Yes that would then show those that voted them in just how much is wasted on them over the year !
Wow it would blow the graph off the wall !!
Dotty

She didn't do so well with the water security either. When they fail that badly they should not get paid at all by taxpayers.

Rae, perhaps not a great result with water but clearly well enough to be promoted to cabinet and given the social security portfolio.

She's not doing so well with Social Security either it seems. How to upset everyone. I don't even get welfare and I'm disgusted by the sheer tone of her speech and the appalling attitude of superiority.

These people get paid too much and there is very little honourable about them unfortunately.

Social Security means just that. She'd be better off ensuring country areas at least have water delivered to Supermarkets while the kids are home from school.

In fact water deliveries should be rolling out across the country. Talk about a National disaster and these clowns fussing about bloody tax cuts.

I don't think I've ever seen a more useless Parliament.

how good is mediocrity?

And the way she said it !

Couldn’t edit my post !

Better ask what happened to all the trillions we paid to build money making assets her foolish Party sold for less than they were worth. Where has all that money gone?

well said

Thank you Farside! After reading the hysterical responses from so many people I wonder how they would cope if they lived in a third world country where they would have nothing to complain about - literally!
Surely level-headed and sane ways of expressing anger are far more valuable in seeking change. Spiteful denigration and vitriol don't help anyone, just show up the real person.

Catkin, intolerance and confected rage are a feature of the zeitgeist of 21st century Australia

I know how you feel Dotty, you work all your life and are told by a child you are getting a generous taxpayer handout - DISGUSTING. Never ever been on the dole etc, never costed the system a cent.
LiveItUp you are just pathetic.

What’s your take on part pensioners then?

Good on them, but they do get the short straw. Many on the part pension are not receiving
decent amounts to offset the pension they are denied. It's not fair across the board to most i.e. part and full pensioners.

Veritas my comment was a response to LiveitUp whose rubbish has been removed. You’ve made some good points however

Good grief, Not a Bludger (?) and LiveItUp, what a pair you 2 are. So sanctimonious, were you 2 at the original Don's Party??? We have a good health system, until you are ramped in an ambulance, or need a hip replacement (2 years maybe?) O.A.P. is adequate if you've been lucky enough to have had full employment for 50 odd years, saved, bought a house and not had your super ripped off by AMP. Otherwise a lot of people a doing it tough.

Bludger says "By any comparison, Australia does have a generous welfare system" ... and where do we sit in relation to the rest of the OECD as a % of GDP?

It is so Crystal Clear

Share market 2019 11% plus

Super 2019 9% plus

Deeming rate is therefore more than generous.

And the fact is poeple once only lived a couple of years on the age pension (if they ever made it to 65/60 at all). Today people live 25-30+ on the pension!

Once we had a gold standard and that mattered. Now we have fake money and the only issue is inflation. Our CPI is dismal so that's obviously not the problem. I think the conservatives are just mean and nasty. Something terribly wrong with the nature of conservatives.

That's a tough stance LiveItUp - the age pension is not "welfare" that was earned via paying taxes - it is a subsistence amount of money paid to people who have no other income. Any decent society and any decent citizen is happy to provide such assistance to those who need it. And it is not "generous" - it is a bare means of living with no frills.
What is generous is that amount of salary, perks and pensions that politicians get - not "earned" but get during and after just a couple of terms in office!

Minister Ruston's comments are mean, arrogant, incorrect and unjustified.

How old are you LiveItUp? You sound like the arrogant youth, same as this misguided Minister.

Way old enough to make my own decisions on things and not just go along with the masses.

VICMT I know exactly where you are coming from, our taxes were a third of our wages in the sixties and bracket creep was rampant. And yes we saved, but we also were paying high taxes for the pension. So LiveItUp you are so crass

YAY SKRAPI

The true fact is the OAP is very generous.

The true fact is the OAP is very generous.

Stop yelling! It doesn't help you get your point across. Too hard to wade through.

to ex PS...CORRECT....

Lyn, did your political predictions come true on May 18th?

Possibly not but if we all looked after ourselves we could end her career . In fact we probably don't actually need an expensive Federal Government these days at all. A co-operative of State representatives could manage the few Federal tasks. It would save billions and we could possibly sell Canberra to pay for the change over.

I like your thinking ... gift the ACT to NSW and NT to SA, invite NZ and have them establish ANZ commissions to work cooperatively, as we do with standards.

Who stole the workers’ compulsory pension fund?
Published 4 April 2015

A regular reader of MM, Wallace, has sent the following, which he had tucked away in his files. Unfortunately, the original author is unknown and the veracity of the article shall be deferred to our learned readers with other knowledge either pro or con. This is an excerpt from a very long piece but for our purposes begins here, with original punctuation errors: (Ed.)
Considerable public relations investment prepares Aussies for this event; generally in the form of proselytising the myth that the younger generation is being stuck with the burden of financing pensions for the ageing baby boomers. The reality could not be more different. This is the story of a different kind of privatisation… outright theft on a multi-billion dollar scale; the appropriation of an entire age pension scheme. We don’t even know where the money went.
The history of the Age Pension Fund is not-well-known and it goes back to 1945, when Prime Minister Ben Chifley became aware of grinding poverty amongst the elderly. He was shocked, and a referendum was put to the people of Australia; and the outcome was a welfare fund contributed to by every Aussie worker, at a rate of 7.5% of gross income (at the time, in Australia and New Zealand, one and sixpence in the pound). This was a fund that was very specifically owned by the workers and declared as such; a fund in which government could not interfere; and from which it could not even borrow. Money could only be paid out as an indexed and non-means tested pension upon retirement at age 65 (60 for women).
To ensure the public was reminded of its investment, and so no government could interfere with the Fund, the amount appeared at the top of every income tax form and was calculated before income tax. Actuaries have calculated that this fund should currently be yielding at $6000 per year more than the current age pension.
Posthumously, former Prime Minister Robert Menzies should be tried for the original theft; perhaps the greatest heist in human history. Former Prime Minister Paul Keating needs to answer the long-stalled question, where is this fund? This is a fund that he illegally, and in breach of the constitutional sacrosanctity of referenda, imposed means testing; on worker’s own savings.
Does the current government know about this? It would certainly explain why on 29 July 2009 the Minister for Aging Jenny Macklin diverted attention from the 1946 fund, by erecting a monument in Canberra to the 1909 age pension scheme which, as she mentioned over-casually, “was means tested, just like today’s version”. Nice try Minister but you are still in possession of stolen funds and imposing illegal means-testing.

another commentator wrote, "It seems that some in government can’t keep their hand of other peoples money. Paul Keating discovered a wad of cash hidden away in the defence forces superannuation fund and decided to steal it and blow it in the usual Labor Party fashion.
It is worth noting that those funds he stole where the compulsory 5.5% input by members of the defence forces and that the government didn’t contribute one single cent to that fund, but he stole the money anyway. Politicians make damned sure that their of grossly indecent superannuation is safe and that they can get their dirty little arse scratchers on it whenever it suits them."

Arvo, let's not get let the facts get in the way of a good story but I would love to see the actuarial studies proving the figures above if it is not complete BS

Abolition of the Fund
In January 1976 the then Treasurer, Mr Lynch, wrote to the Department of Social Security. He stated that, as the balance of the Fund was only an 'historical balance' not affecting the payment of funds and not necessary, the balance was to be paid into the Consolidated Revenue Fund. At that time the balance was $469.9m. He reported to Parliament in February during discussion of the Loan Bill 1976

"... balances amount to some $470m and are currently invested in internal Treasury Bills. While this measure requires no legislative action, it is, I believe, appropriate it should be the subject of information to the Parliament... Obviously, in these circumstances, no working balance is required in the Trust Account. The Audit Act provides a procedure whereby moneys not required for the purposes of a Trust Account may be transferred to the Consolidated Revenue Fund upon determination by the Treasurer. I intend that the
internal treasury bill holdings of the National Welfare Fund Trust Account be redeemed. The cash resulting from the redemption of the internal treasury bills will be paid direct to the Consolidated Revenue Fund. It is, of course, from the Consolidated Revenue Fund that all expenditures on social security are now met. " [Hansard, 26 February 1976, p.328.]

Menzies had already recognised the fund was then merely an accounting activity and served no real function. The 1980-81 Auditor-General's Report criticised the arrangement as inefficient.

On 26 March 1985, the Minister Assisting the Treasurer, the Hon. C. Hurford, introduced a Bill to repeal the National Welfare Fund Act 1943 and to make all relevant social service payments directly from the Consolidated Revenue Fund. This Bill passed the House of Representatives on 22 April and the Senate on 10 May 1985.

https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:%22library/prspub/4511255%22

Farside- "Prime Minister Ben Chifley became aware of grinding poverty amongst the elderly. He was shocked, and a referendum was put to the people of Australia; and the outcome was a welfare fund contributed to by every Aussie worker, at a rate of 7.5% of gross income (at the time, in Australia and New Zealand, one and sixpence in the pound). This was a fund that was very specifically owned by the workers and declared as such; a fund in which government could not interfere; and from which it could not even borrow"
Are you stating this was not true?

.
.
Farside is there a reason you believe everything someone says simply because they are an elected politician? It seems to be your task to defend them.

Perhaps Treasury and the Fraser Government got it wrong. It wouldn't be the first time.

In the case where they have breached the Constitution yet again perhaps that Future Fund could be used to replace the Welfare Fund taken.

Both Parties have tried sneaking representatives into the Parliament unconstitutionally. That's public record.

In fact we have had legislation passed here recently that is still being challenged by the judiciary. They don't always get it right just because they are members of a Party.

Rae, I do not believe everything an elected politician says, nor do I take on faith the selectively reasoned and unsupported opinions over theft of the Welfare Fund.

I am more persuaded by bona fide research than politicians speeches and unsupported opinion. For example, old mate Arvo reposts an opinion about the origins of the National Welfare Fund and its current value, but where is the evidence to support the claims. He mention Chifley becoming aware of poverty in 1945 when the National Welfare Fund was established in 1943; the approach to old age pensions and other social security was extensively debated from the late 1930s. Arvo says a referendum "was put to the people of Australia; and the outcome was a welfare fund" but when and which referendum? Arvo says "the fund is specifically owned by the workers and declared as such"; really, it was established by legislation as a trust account with the Parliament as trustee to receive income for making social security payments (that included all forms of social security, something overlooked by the theft argument proponents). And then let's get to the actuarial modelling if it exists ...

Do I believe Chifley was genuine in his stated intent for the levy or was it more post-war revenue raising? I don't know but the record shows it being argued the government "freely admitted that the whole amount of the fund would not be used for the purpose for which ostensibly it was established but that some of it would be used for war purposes". Do you believe the various government levies today are used solely for the purposes they were established - I suspect not?

Are you saying the Fraser government did not transfer the balance of the account? If not then where is it? I don't disagree that governments and MPs have acted unconstitutionally from time to time and I would add the judiciary does not always get it right for the times, which is why precedent can be overruled. Even old mate Chifley was found to have acted unconstitutionally in 1944 when he tried to introduce free medicines.

Ruston is right and good to see someone is prepared to tell the truth.

Government needs to use that surplus to pay back all the accumulated debt.

Many are on the OAP by choice too.

Yes, government is not a business, and any surplus needs to be reinvested in the business and people who helped to create it - ie taxpayers- - not socked away by the government of the day just so they can boast they "had a surplus". sure, pay some of it to reduce debt, but have the decency and courage to fund essential services like pensions, health care, dental care, education etc.

Debt means that far too much interest is being paid instead of benefits.

"Government needs to use that surplus to pay back all the accumulated debt"
Well why have they doubled the deficit since they've been in power LiveItUp, and why did they just give a huge tax break to our most wealthy who don't need it. Where are they going to get the money for the debt - cutting service for health, education and social services no doubt.

I'll come and live with you and show you why the OAP is so generous.

I'd like to see that!

Me too !!

LiveItUp probably thinks baked beans are a "luxury" - maybe that's why he/she thinks the OAP is "generous"! lol

Live in a tent someplace - camp stove and baked beans Mon. to Fri. and "dumpster dive" at midnight outside ya' local Woolies for Sat/Sun. "delights"! Yeah that's it!! Simple! :-)

Euthanasia is looking attractive !!

OAP pension has nothing to do with whether you worked or not. It is simply welfare paid to those who have no other means of support.

Yes I'll send her a letter and say how grateful I am that someone has been game enough to tell the truth.

Today's taxpayer funds your welfare OAP and it has nothing to do with what you contributed at all.

Yes floss, if shifty was our "president" we would be living in land flowing with milk and honey.

Wellk roy, at least we'd be able to go to the dentist and get out teeth fixed if Labor was in power and those on Newstart might fair a bit better too.

libsarellars, don't you believe it, Shifty is all mouth and trousers and bouncy boobs too, have you seen him jogging, sheesh.

BTW, the above is the email I sent to the privileged senator.

either BTW:
Don't just complain tin this site but get to it and send an email to the minister. PLEASE>

Great letter Alexii.

Great letter, very similar to the letter I sent to her.

And me.

this is an idea worth debating.

Really good question. Could be a real conflict of interest issue. Senators shouldn't be ministers. Really odd stuff going on in the Parliament these days. Even foreign politicians and others who should never have been elected in the first place. Not surprising it's a mess.

Ahhhhh ............. a "Soylent Green" advocate - just like me! Cheers ..... :-)

I didn't vote for them panos, just some gullible fools.

Agree 100% Irish !!

that is an idea worth exploring Sea Dog

Reforming MP remuneration is long overdue. The idea that ex-MPs might struggle for jobs if not re-elected is obsolete in the gig economy with its fixed period contracts. There should be transparency over salaries, super, benefits etc and it would be much easier if aligned to the standards that apply to those in the regular work force.

I suspect a salary more comparable to other OECD MPs would do little to change those running for office. I would like to see a referendum on how much we think a fair pay is for the GG, PM and MPs that reflects our position in the world. Does the PM need to be the second highest paid government leader in the OECD? Double the Canadian PM, really?

Spot on Farside.

Google Jackie Trad Queensland ALP, another champagne socialist, head in trough, bought a house, didn't declare it it will at least double in value when new cross river route goes through. Absolute filth, labor 99 f them.

Yes roy all as bad as each other. All in it for the money. We need the parties gone and preferential voting gone and just one representative for each area having to work together. At least half their incomes as well so they are there for the glory and not the riches.

roy, if you are confident your allegations are anything but BS then refer it to the CCC and let us know the outcome. Here is the link http://www.ccc.qld.gov.au/corruption/online-complaint-form/wizard_form

Farside. It's just come through that the ALP champagne socialist is selling the "controversial" property, therefore no need for me to do your wishes.
Are you happy now comrade?

Any news on Shifty's used car dealership or where he got his alleged $61 mill fortune?

99% of ALP mp's give the rest of them a bad name!

Farside, google Courier Mail, the news has just come through10 minutes ago. So not BS after all, I'll accept your apology comrade.
Apparently her husband bought it without her knowledge, dear oh dear, she must think we are really dumb. After all it was only in the region of $650,000. We would all know whether our spouse had spent that sort of money wouldn't we?
She know we are really dumb because millions of people vote for the ALP, shakes head.

roy, comrade - really, how so? You were the one alleging something dodgy. Feel free to go after Shorten if he is also in your sights, or indeed any other MP, civil servant or anybody else in a trusted position.

And to your question "We would all know whether our spouse had spent that sort of money wouldn't we?", well no, I would not know as she has her own accounts and investments.

You got it one, exactly right Onemore

it's a fair point, the individual remuneration components are easily found but not as easy as it should be to find the total costs for each MP. Write your MP??

to all your wincers, start living, I order a home delivery of a restaurant in my area, usual on a saturday, too crowded in the pub or r.s.l, at a cost of give or take $ 20.00 delivered and on the sunday I go to the pub or r.s.l for a meal, seniors, I am in my eighties, cost: meal $16.00, drinks $ 10.00, Taxi to and from plus and minus $20.00, total less then $ 50.00, take in savings of gas or electric for cooking your own meal, say $ 20.00, the cost is less then $30.00, just try it and start living instead of moaning, after all life is too short to prejudge other people's meaning of how they like to live their lives.

maybe it has not got through to you but labor lost the elections simple for their attitude to the pensioners, to refuse their legal entitlements of paid tax returns or to refuse, as used by all other bussinesses, lawful expences, then it is not hard to understand why labor lost their "unlosable election" yet you now complain because someone uttered some words about pensioners doing allright, well I am one of those who can't complain and is happy to receive the pension, why bite the hand that feeds you

Trouble is heemsk the hand that feeds everyone gives such as this
re-used, cold meals in 'race to the bottom',
residents wasting away because they're not given enough food
etc etc
see here
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-16/aged-care-royal-commission-hears-from-maggie-beer/11313810?fbclid=IwAR0HaYdna9zXh0AjeY52EjVjfoG0eUuXe-XUeNPM4woRtsr2FwWEu7MJyvo

Whereas the hand that feeds themselves (politicians) gives such as this
POLITICIANS’ DAILY TRAVEL ALLOWANCE MORE THAN WEEKLY WELFARE
at the opposite extreme end of the spectrum see here
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/the-feed/politicians-daily-travel-allowance-more-than-weekly-welfare-payment

congratulations PIXAPD, your story is certainly different to most we hear about. It would make an interesting subject for an article .... Kaye, YLC are you listening???

So you just don't go anywhere or do anything huh?

Rent costs me nothing, one of the boons of getting the pension

are you a current or vanished politician? present full facts or vanish and go back to from where you came

are you a current or vanished politician? present full facts or vanish and go back to from where you came

Bulla, What an INANE comment you made, it gives much mirth

why are you bullshitting instead of coming out with facts? Must have lived on stolen money and still living same way. An honest person would have stated the facts instead of dodging the query

why are you bullshitting instead of coming out with facts? Must have lived on stolen money and still living same way. An honest person would have stated the facts instead of dodging the query