|
Post by pjmpjm on Jun 23, 2015 8:13:52 GMT 7
Senate passes legislation to tighten pension eligibility
The Government's largest budget measure, the tightening of pension eligibility, has passed both houses of Parliament.
The $2.4 billion savings measure passed late last night after a deal between the Coalition and the Greens last week.
Under the proposal, more than 170,000 pensioners with low and modest levels of assets will have their pension increased by around $30 a fortnight.
Labor said they opposed the changes because they would reduce part pensions for 235,000 people and cut them entirely for 90,000 other pensioners with large amounts of assets.
Social Services Minister Scott Morrison said it was both a win for pension fairness and for the budget bottom line.
"This is a fairly emphatic endorsement of the Government's policy, but also of the Government's budget," he said.
"The have-a-go budget is gaining real traction in the Senate.
"Some $3.5 billion worth of savings passed the Senate, not just the pension assets test change but also the seniors supplement passed."
Greens leader Richard Di Natale said in striking the deal with the Coalition, he had managed to convince the Government to put superannuation back on the agenda.
However, Labor's Jenny Macklin said the Greens had been "completely dudded" as the Government had made it clear they would not change tax concessions on superannuation.
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jun 23, 2015 8:23:49 GMT 7
Right, that is totally as expected. And just for the record I don't change my political alignment because legislation goes for or against me. Avoiding further political comment, I understand that is not allowed here. Under the proposal, more than 170,000 pensioners with low and modest levels of assets will have their pension increased by around $30 a fortnight. This one is totally mythological, unless someone can spell it out, I fail to see where this extra $30 is coming from. Read more: dspoverseas.proboards.com/thread/4058/pension-changes-pass-senate-news#ixzz3dqOuWEFS
|
|
|
Post by pjmpjm on Jun 23, 2015 9:02:19 GMT 7
Under the proposal, more than 170,000 pensioners with low and modest levels of assets will have their pension increased by around $30 a fortnight. This one is totally mythological, unless someone can spell it out, I fail to see where this extra $30 is coming from. I'll report back here as to what happens with my own OAP. I'm guessing that I'm somewhere in the 'low assets' category.
|
|
|
Post by pjmpjm on Jun 23, 2015 9:10:50 GMT 7
Here's the slant from news.com.au
$2.4b pension changes pass parliament (AAP)
ALP has been challenged to prove its sincerity by vowing to reverse controversial pension changes.
TENS of thousands of retirees will lose their pensions while others will get a bit extra each week under controversial new rules on asset ownership.
LEGISLATION to tighten the pension asset test passed the Senate on Monday night, hours after it cleared the House of Representatives.
The Australian Greens backed the bill - which cuts payments for pensioner couples who own $823,000 in assets outside their family home - after shaking hands with the government on a deal last week.
The measures will reduce pension cheques for 235,756 seniors, cut 91,378 people from the part-pension and give 171,658 retirees about $15 a week extra.
Greens leader Richard Di Natale said he was surprised the measures were so controversial and had failed to attract support from Labor.
While many of the Abbott government's budget measures "stink", the pension changes make a modest improvement to the system, he said.
"I'm staggered that we're here," Senator Di Natale told the upper house on Monday evening. "I thought this would be a non-controversial debate."
Labor railed against the government's "dirty" deal with the Greens, accusing the coalition of breaking its pre-election promise not to cut the pension.
The government says the legislation ensures pensions are fairer, better targeted and sustainable. It will save the budget $2.4 billion.
Independent senator Jacqui Lambie opposed the bill which she believes seeks to tear Australian society apart. "It deliberately creates winners and losers in a generation that knows the meaning of hard work and sacrifice," she said.
Fellow crossbencher Glenn Lazarus implored the government to stop targeting those who were unable to protect themselves. He's concerned retirees banking on their pensions won't have time to make alternative arrangements before the changes come into effect in January 2017. "Retirement is one of the biggest life changes a person can make," he told the Senate. "Don't change the pension and retirement goalposts without fair warning."
The opposition is concerned the bill was rushed through parliament for fear of the government-Greens deal falling over. As part of the deal, the government agreed to extend its tax review to include superannuation, but quickly ruled out making any changes to retirement incomes.
"The Greens have sent a million retirees up the river for short term political gain," Labor senator Helen Polley said. However, the Greens say they voted against the Howard-government policy when it was implemented and believe the measure was purely a "cash giveaway" that handed pensions to millionaires.
Labor maintains the changes will hurt middle Australia, not wealthy retirees.
Earlier in the lower house, Social Services Minister Scott Morrison challenged Labor to promise to reverse the measures to prove its outrage was genuine. "If they really believe it, then they should commit to reversing it," he said. "Otherwise it's a hollow commitment." It was up to opposition backbencher Sharon Claydon to take up that call. "Labor will take this to the next election," she said.
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jun 23, 2015 9:14:03 GMT 7
Under the proposal, more than 170,000 pensioners with low and modest levels of assets will have their pension increased by around $30 a fortnight. This one is totally mythological, unless someone can spell it out, I fail to see where this extra $30 is coming from. I'll report back here as to what happens with my own OAP. I'm guessing that I'm somewhere in the 'low assets' category. Yes, let us know and when will it come into affect.
|
|