When the Coalition became Government in 2023, their priority was to reverse the devastating social and economic impact of the former Ardern-Hipkins Government. Their failings were universal, but particularly evident in the economy.
As a result of Labour’s six years in office, Core Crown expenditure escalated from 27 percent of GDP in 2017, to almost 35 percent, and net core Crown debt more than doubled from below 20 percent, to over 42 percent.
Labour’s profligate spending and excessive borrowing had plunged the country into hyperinflation followed by a double-dip recession.
The dire state of the country wasn’t too dissimilar to what John Key inherited back in 2008, when the expansionary tax and spend policies of Helen Clark’s Labour Government had driven the economy into a recession months ahead of the Global Financial Crisis.
With Finance Minister Bill English at the helm, National’s goal was to get government spending under control and, over time, reduce it down to 25 percent of the economy.
This objective was outlined in a pre-budget speech in May 2014, “In 2008 government spending was 35 percent of our GDP. Now that has dropped to 30 percent, and we want that to be dropping to 26 percent and 25 percent in the next six and seven years.”
At the time of the GFC, while some economists argued that bigger governments and stimulus spending was the way to improve growth, the Cato Institute’s Richard Rahn, chairman of the Institute for Global Economic Growth, explained that wasn’t the case:
“A new study just completed shows the optimum size of government is less than 25 percent of GDP. Rather than increasing the size of government, the empirical evidence shows that sharply reducing taxes, regulations, and government spending down to at least 25 percent of GDP would do the most to spur economic growth and create more jobs over the long run.”
At the time, then Treasury Secretary John Whitehead also suggested the quality of government spending was a key part of New Zealand’s problem:
“We have focussed too much on new spending and not enough on the huge base of existing spending. This year’s total Budget is $62 billion and it includes spending on policies introduced five, or 15 years ago, that may no longer be effective or fit Government objectives. Across government, there is about $40 billion of public money, that could be used differently and better.”
In other words, he believed that almost 60 percent of all government spending could be better used.
The Secretary then warned, “The state sector is a very large part of the economy – central and local government combined represent about 40 percent of GDP – so it is hugely important that it works as efficiently as possible to support the private sector. We cannot afford to crowd out private enterprise or impose unnecessary costs on people and businesses.”
With the State sector growing to over 43 percent of the economy, it is more important than ever to recognise that it is private enterprise, not the government, that creates the jobs and wealth that lift economic growth and living standards.
By increasing taxation and burdening the country with more bureaucrats, greater debt, and escalating debt servicing costs, obese governments destroy innovation and entrepreneurship – the very things that create growth.
Instead of the country having a ‘can do’ attitude, the heavy hand of government forces those with get up and go, to get up and go elsewhere.
Our situation is not dissimilar to what confronted Margaret Thatcher in 1979 when she became Prime Minister of post-war Britain. Racked by stagflation, she promised to restore a culture of entrepreneurship: “I came to office with one deliberate intent: to change Britain to a self-reliant society… A get-up-and-go, instead of a sit-back-and-wait-for-it Britain.”
Her reforms embracing freedom, lower taxes, and less regulation, reinvigorated the British economy.
West Germany, however, had introduced fundamental reform straight after the war. Virtually overnight, Economics Minister Ludwig Erhardt cut bureaucracy, flattened taxes, and transformed the country into a free market economy.
To encourage work, tax on overtime – over 40 hours a week – was abolished, and to incentivise exports, taxes on all profits earned through exports were eliminated. Productivity soared, and exports skyrocketed. The country prospered, and Germany, was on the path to become one of the world’s strongest economies.
Getting the fundamentals right was also the key to the transformation of Hong Kong and Singapore from third world countries into powerhouse economies. Both maintain limited governments with low-tax environments to attract business and investment. Corporate tax rates which start under 10 percent then rise to a maximum of 17 percent based on profits, along with personal tax rates that peak at 17 percent in Hong Kong and 22 percent in Singapore, are in sharp contrast to the situation in New Zealand, where corporate taxes are 28 percent and the top income tax rate is 39 percent.
History is unequivocal – the best way to grow an economy is for the Government to get out of the way and let businesses do what they do best: create jobs and wealth. Once released from the shackles of excessive taxation and an overbearing bureaucracy, innovation will flourish. It’s commonsense – but not to socialist politicians who try to convince voters that they are the solution.
To build a better future, the Coalition needs to harness the energy and expertise of entrepreneurial investors. And while that’s what they say they are doing, in reality, they are failing to get the basics right.
Instead of curtailing expenditure, figures from the 2025 Budget Policy Statement show increased spending and rising debt. The wonderful opportunity the Coalition had to take control of the books and set New Zealand on the right path is being squandered.
For instance, why haven’t most of the 19,000 additional staff hired by the Ardern Government – that took public service employees to almost 65,000 – been given their marching orders? Not only are they costing taxpayers an additional $1.5 billion a year, but a large proportion are “Diversity, Equity, Inclusion” activists hired by Labour to drive their radical identity politics programmes – including He Puapua and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
The fact that this toxic agenda is still being rolled out indicates the Coalition is failing to uphold one of their key election commitments – to replace race-based policy with needs-based initiatives grounded on equal rights.
Ridding the country of Jacinda Ardern’s He Puapua legacy would have saved hundreds of millions of dollars not only in wages, but in a myriad of destructive race-based programmes that should already have been axed.
As the Treasury Secretary said all those years ago, the State sector is awash with costly programmes that no longer fit Government objectives and are well past their use-by date.
But getting rid of such programmes requires courage. And there are now growing concerns over whether the Coalition has what it takes to give our country the best chance of a decent future.
They are, without a doubt, better than the opposition, which has degenerated into a toxic mix of parties that have abandoned the very people they purport to represent. A Labour Party that prioritises identity groups based on race, gender, and sexuality over the working class. A Green Party that has turned its back on environmentalism to embrace communism. And a Maori Party that is using the Maori seats to attack democracy itself.
But the point is this: New Zealanders deserve a government that is prepared to make the tough decisions that put the good of the country first.
Apart from failing to cut spending and reduce debt, there are questions over whether the Coalition will be prepared to properly address the funding crisis caused by our rapidly aging population.
This is an issue that has worried this week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator, former Finance Minister and ACT founder Sir Roger Douglas, ever since Robert Muldoon axed Norman Kirk’s Superannuation Savings Scheme:
“Labour in 1974, introduced a compulsory superannuation system for all workers. Had that policy remained in force today, most would be retiring with more than one million dollars. Norman Kirk’s Labour Party was aspirational for their supporters; they wanted them to have the same opportunities as other New Zealanders in areas like super.
“Ever since Muldoon’s National Party introduced their extremely expensive pay-as-you-go pension system in 1976, New Zealand has progressively accumulated more and more unfunded liabilities each year. Today New Zealand’s unfunded liabilities exceed one and a quarter trillion dollars, to which you can add 40 billion dollars each year for inflation. Today’s young people have, over the past 50 years, been slowly robbed of their rights, their freedom, and their futures.
“The culprits? Muldoon and National who introduced the new superannuation policies in 1976, and the politicians who have followed them… The crisis of New Zealand’s unfunded obligations, entered into so willingly by New Zealand’s politicians of all stripes over the past 50 years, is about to hit us very hard indeed. It will not be pretty.”
As Sir Roger points out, Treasury has projected that our healthcare and superannuation costs will increase by 6.4 percent of GDP or $100 billion by 2061. When other expenditure is added, including an operating deficit of 13.3 percent of GDP, government debt of 197 percent of GDP, and net interest costs of $120-plus billion a year, New Zealand would be effectively insolvent, well before 2061.
Had Labour’s 1974 Superannuation Scheme, which provided security in retirement through personalised superannuation accounts, not been axed, New Zealand would be a rich country, and Kiwis would be enjoying one of the highest living standards in the world.
But sadly, as Roger has explained, politics got in the way – and it is still in the way.
Unless there’s a surprise in the Budget, while the Coalition now appears prepared to discuss the approaching superannuation crisis, if they are unable to balance the budget, it seems unlikely they would even consider the sort of reforms Sir Roger is proposing.
Instead of living from hand to mouth as the population ages, with mounting debt liabilities and more taxation, Sir Roger’s plan would deal with the problem in a way that would enable New Zealanders to retire with millions of dollars in savings.
By redirecting a portion of the income tax that people pay to the government into their own personalised super savings accounts, thanks to the ‘magic’ of compound interest, over a working lifetime modest savings are turned into substantial funds that can be converted into generous annuities on retirement.
The only losers are the politicians who will be forced to surrender some of their power as tax money that would have gone into government coffers for them to redistribute, is redirected into the personal retirement savings accounts of Kiwis, to cover off the major cost of superannuation.
Sir Roger’s ideas are not new. He’s been refining his plan for over thirty years. But with the announcement that the first ever withdrawal from the New Zealand Super Fund – a government investment set up in 2001 to help cover the future cost of pensions – will take place in 2028, the time has now arrived where New Zealand can no longer ignore this looming crisis.
Quality reform is now called for. But here’s the problem – where is the party with the vision to adopt Roger’s plan as the best way forward for New Zealand?
Where is the party with the courage to set New Zealand on the path to a better future – one where the good of New Zealanders is put first, and where there’s no kowtowing to vested interest groups demanding special privileges.
And if there isn’t such a party prepared to address these matters and make the necessary changes, Sir Roger asks whether it’s time to follow the lead of Reform in the UK and set one up?
Please note – if you are interested in joining our Reform Project, and haven’t already signed up, you can register HERE.
Please note: To register for our free weekly newsletter please click HERE.
THIS WEEK’S POLL ASKS:
*Do you believe our retirement savings system needs to be reformed; if so, how?
*Poll comments are posted below.
*All NZCPR poll results can be seen in the Archive.
THIS WEEK’S POLL COMMENTS
| Racist and divisive! | Dr. Alastair |
| Raise Super-start age to 70 NOW. Drop All NZ payments to UNO asap because whole concept (man-made GW) a big scam! | Francis |
| No never. As a one word law with no clear meaning? Interpreted on a case by case basis to mean whatever is needed. Obsoletely corruption!!! | Neil |
| Im in my early 60s. Not a good age to be in NZ. I have worked or studied all my life and paid tax. I have a manual job so I will at some point wear myself out. I have next to nothing in kiwisaver because I can’t afford to contribute anything, thanks to the economy over the last 7 yrs and kiwisaver hasn’t been going long enough anyway. I also still have a mortgage. Seems you are disadvantaged for working hard here. If I didn’t have self respect and responsibility I could be better off sitting at home on a benefit! | DIANE |
| Yes, along the lines of the 70s Douglas scheme but no cash outs as per Kiwisaver. Only withdrawals at maturity, pension age, or death, at any age, when it goes into your estate. | David |
| Nothing will happen to superannuation while Winston Peters is in power. He has turned out to be quite the obstructionist as far as any changes to superannuation is concerned. Raise the age to 70 slowly. | Monica |
| No,it needs the government to leave it to individuals to work it out for themselves. Save and have a good life,don’t save and be miserable, simple really. If unable to save then the taxpayer (government)has responsibility. | Peter |
| For a start, the eligible age for superannuation needs to be raised to 67. | Chris |
| Lift the eligibility rate to 67 with some exceptions. | Graham |
| We can’t afford it and it’s going to get worse. People on good income after 65, should have super reduced or not start till 70 years ! | Patrick |
| increase the age for eligibility to 67 | Noel |
| Age of entitlement needs to be raised progressively to 70 soon enough to make a useful difference. Reducing the impact of Local Body Rates by trimming Local government back to sensible size and cost would assist all, including those living on retirement incomes. | Peter |
| Invest in greater interest bearing schemes | Warren |
| Retirement savings are tinkered with too often. Stability is the key to a decent savings scheme. | Andrew |
| The ‘REFORMS’ CARRIED OUT, BY CERTAIN POLITICIANS AGAINST WORKERS IN THE 80s’ were CRUEL AND VISCIOUS…..we ALL remember how tough, those times were we will never forget… SO LEAVE OUR PENSIONS ALONE, WE PAID OUR TAXES AND DUES, WE DON’T OWE THEM NOTHING!! NO! | David |
| More compulsory savings, taken directly from wages and change retirement age to 67 | Lucienne |
| WE need a compulsory scheme like the one Muldoon cancelled years ago. Kiwi Saver must be complulsory | Ian |
| Well it seems Piggy stuffed up our super . Sir Roger’s scheme sounds feasible and something needs to be done asap. My God have our politicians ruined this country. Both L Labour and National are to blame ,so reform is liking the next option, and Act seem to be making more sense than the others with NZ 1st chipping in to. We have to make some hard decisions fast or we are stuffed. | Peter |
| Make super compulsory | Brian |
| Plan for the long run. | Mat |
| I would love to see it reformed, but people in NZ don’t earn enough for money to be taken out of their income in a compulsory scheme | Christine |
| As proposed by Sir Roger Douglas | Vic |
| NO.. don’t reform our pension, there should be plenty of GOVT. FUNDS and besides, there is no need to. Make KIWI SAVER COMPULSORY… WHEN PEOPLE START WORKING AND INCREASE TAXATION! SIMPLE… | David |
| Its rather ironic that the fly-wheel effect of advanced medical technology can be credited with extending a person’s life, which then causes a greater number of aged people to having to be accounted for, by way of increasing proportionally, the numbers of aged citizens who qualify in receiving their entitled superannuation. It looks as though we need to act with urgent intent to create a compounding fund scheme just for the purpose of future funding our pensions. Therefore, we need to ensure that everybody pays their full tax obligation and that all profit making enterprises also pay their full tax obligations. There should be NO free loaders allowed. We must all contribute. | Garry. |
| WE nedto bring in a phased raise to elelgibilty maybe as suggested by Bill Ebnglish 67 minimum age and rising steadily withn a start year of next year | Barry |
| compulsory savings | Neville |
| Sir Roger was right Muldoon was an arrogant dickhead | Warren |
| AS outlined in the article | Alastair |
| Listen to Roger Douglas | Albert |
| Start the individual accounts scheme now for all new entrants, spot it is being phased in. Align closer to Australian model. | Paula |
| There should be 2 levels of pension. 1 that incentivizes workers and one for those non contributors | Chris |
| Was Peter Dunn’s idea ever evaluated? He suggested allowing people to withdraw super early but at a reduced rate & later at a higher rate. That might appease those who feel hard done by while incentivising those who carry on working??? | Fiona |
| Increase eligibility age, means test super,as an option adopt Australia type scheme, or Norm Kirk’s model. Douglas model would need experts evaluation, I don’t believe Douglas theories are always the ideal, in fact I could argue his free market theories are part of our current problems. Agree Luxon ,Nat’s are the serious problem for NZ, just as Key was not the superstar he thought he was. Neither National or Labour are the answer to the future , so a remodelled ACT /NZF majority or a new reform Party would be ananswer. | Roger |
| Kiwisaver needs to become compulsory. | Wayne |
| No they don’t need to be reformed….infact the pension needs to be increased, pensioners are doing it tough, they have worked, and payed taxes all their life they deserve to be looked after, they should be left alone, to enjoy their retirement. NO. | David |
| We need a compulsory system like Australia has had for many years. | Jerry |
| lEAVE WELL ALONE | Thomas |
| Roger Douglas has got the method to correct this. | Simon |
| raise the age | s |
| Increase Kiwisaver contributions; Increase NZ Super eligibility age | John |
| We do not need the government to take the initiative. Just save your own money and don’t engage in their schemes.. You know they will screw it up. | Ken |
| Incrementally raise retirment age | John |
| A means and tax-payer tested scheme. The booming Maori economy could be explored to provide cover for trace Maori requiting pensions at retirement age. | mary |
| Just add percentage of your personal tax to existing schemes. Percentages of people on benefits must also go into schemes. Stop paying pensions to over 65s still working full time. Part time work criteria alread exists. T then age should not have to be lifted. | Kevin |
| I definitely believe it is time to make Kiwi saver compulsory and perhaps it is times to means test wealthy pensioners. | marie |
| means test for super | Ian |
| Must be compulsory, start 18 years Must be in recipients name only (ownership) Cannot be paid to anyone else other than owner of their paid in funds however unused funds due to early death can be claimed by nominated family. Cannot be confiscated by Governments Tax deferred until drawn down Managed outside of Government. that is, contracted out away from interest groups. Compulsory employer contribution matched at employer amount. Contribution by each individual is the same over their working life where some will pay their contribution off sooner than others. Option to retire at 60, taking a lessor amount to start early. Teach finance and civics in school. | Sam |
| You mention the word courage in your article and I doubt any government has the courage to adopt the reforms Roger Douglas has proposed. | Lawrie |
| Raise the age for retirement to 67. Enforce personal saving by increasing the amount deducted from income. Abandon the top up scheme cos its stupid. | Derek |
| Revisit the Kirk initiative. | Tony |
| Made compulsory | Geoffrey |
| As per R.D proposal outlined, last year I recalI. | Glenn |
| put retirement age up as part of | leo |
| increase the age over 5 years to 70 and make it means tested based on taxable income | Andrew |
| Progressive increase in age of entitlement. Progressively install means testing indexed to CPI. | Rod |
| simple – go down the same path as Australia has – it appears to be working for them | Trevor |
| It should be means tested and the age of entitlement should be raised to 67. There should also be a compulsory retirement savings scheme with less leeway than Kiwisaver. | Graeme |
| Raise the age of entitlement for Superannuation payments to 67, over the next 3 years, and reform and reintroduce a similar program to Labour’s 1974 Superannuation scheme with personalised Superannuation accounts. | Mary |
| Compulsory Super but not as it has been. | Michael |
| I agree on principle but the scheme needs to be better than the one introduced by Labour in 1974 as that scheme was a dog. | Murray |
| At some point it should be means tested. | Heather |
| Allow a higher limit of tax deductability for contributions to Kiwi Saver and do not tax either the Kiwi Saver growth or the NZ Super Fund growth. | Glenn |
| Raise the entitlement age to 67 like the previous National Govt had proposed. | Pete |
| Don’t meddle with our super, it’s fine the way it is…LEAVE IT ALONE! | David |
| Means Testing | Mark |
| make it compulsory for all at 5% for employee and employer | John |
| New Zealanders living in Australia and getting the Australian pension and part payment from NZ, WHY? so stop that and save this country this amount which must be huge, emigrants that bring out their parents who are elderly SHOULD NOT GET THE NZ PENSION, when MPs retire why should they get all there perks and when they die it then goes to the wife, that to me would save millions and millionaires like key and Co Should not receive the pension as they have payed bugger all tax because they can afford accountants that make sure they don’t,AND tax the so called charity’s and make super compulsory like many other countries | Richard |
| The super qualifying age needs to be lifted in increments over a period to 67, 68, 69, 70. Sper contributions should be mandatory, as they are in Singapore. | Kerry |
| We need to make a complusory Savings scheme similar to Singapores system, which also has medical and education benefits in the mix- without a complusory scheme this country will fall into insolvency | John |
| There have been so many changes brought about by political reasoning instead of financial reasoning. I am not qualified to give advice on this. | Denis |
| Have a system where everyone has their own superannuation account, i.e make Kiwisaver compulsory. If the current universal system remains the age of eligibility needs to move to 70 years old. | graeme |
| If that piss head Muldoon had left it alone on the 7s, we would have been cock a hoop now for us wrinkly’s. | Sam |
| Contributions should be compulsory as in Australia. | Phil |
| Not sure. | Tony |
| By reinstating Norman Kirk’s personal superannuation scheme. | Gordon |
| I am a retiree, but I did not stop work at 65 and it was not about the money – I think the age has to be raised on some sort of statistical method. Carefully. | Maurice |
| Sir Roger’s reforms, or something akin to them (rather like Australia’s system) should have been brought in, rather than Sir Robert Muldoon’s scheme. Along with this, reducing the public service to something close to what it was numerically before the last 2017-23 Labour-led administration, should trim the government expenditure. However, this coalition seems unwilling to tackle the hard decisions. Led by a spineless National Party, this lot, like Labour, is happy to kick the can down the road and leave it to some luckless administration sometime in the future. | Gavin |
| Yes Follow Sir Rogers ideas they have been proven right in many countries and will be in NZ Sorry but I for one fell for the Reds under the Bed campaign that puts even more power into the hands of Government | RFG |
| As per Roger Doulas proposes | Graeme |
| Copy the aussie system or the swiss system. One thing we cant do in this country is ever get good government. Its all ideaology | Alan |
| Go back to compulsory deduction from wages and benefits — ALL should pay for a new and revised super policy. | Alan |
| Progessively lift the age of entitlement. It’s been proposed before by the likes of Bill English (admittedly with a timid target) the government needs to propose it again and get on with it. | Martin |
| I agree with Roger Douglas’ approach and it is not too late to continue with our current Kiwi Saver Superannuation Schemes but there needs to be increases in the employee and employer contributions. One way of increasing the employer contributions is to reduce the tax deducted on current employer contributions to a lower rate of 10 to 15% or even nil. Compulsory saving in the form of superannuation, is essential for growth and investment in the economy growth. | Keith |
| Raise entitlement age. Reintroduce mandatory personalised saving scheme | Jim |
| Every time a “retirement savings scheme” is introduced, it is stuffed up. The whole government is a stuff up and needs to be rethought. Just a Hitler did in the 30s, the banks need to be thrown out, and New Zealand start on a decentralized monetry system, which can only be of digital design. remove taxation. the country would then grow and flourish. Suggested watching, Adolf Hitler: The Greatest Story Never Told.the Most Lied about Man in the last century. The power of this documentary is that it slaps in your face bigtime with the hard truth. Look at what is happening right now and we can see what the bankers are doing to our world. Their goal is to steal your stuff, and take your life. this is happening before our eyes. The government we have is doing just this. | Neil |
| Means test applied to people entering the work force age 18. Compulsory deductions of 6% and employer contributions at 9% as in Australia starting for those aged 18 | Malcolm |
| pension saving scheme with no withdrawal option | Howard |
| Compulsory percentage of current personal tax retained into a personal superannuation fund bank account which is unable to be accessed until age 60. | Koreen |
| Compulsory Govt. fund that is untouchable by Govt. | Margaret |
| follow sir rogers formula | Helen |
| Every working person should contribute to their own pension scheme….some will put in lots, and the Govt can always top up the” poor performers”….. | Peter |
| Our social welfare system has allowed kiwis to have a lazy attitude about their twilight year, ‘oh well, at least if I own nothing, I can use my pension to pay for my retirement in a facility’ and yet those who work and provide for their retirement years, are required to pay by selling up to enter such facilities. Those who have still seem to pay for those who don’t. There is no equality in that. Therefore, every single NZlander needs to set money aside for their retirement whether it’s through the social welfare payments or the jobs that they do! | Jo |
| Increase retirement age for starters and reinstate the 1974pension plan | linda |
| A simple ‘means test’ to collate who needs to have it. Remove Tax from retirement savings. | Peter |
| Lock contributions in till people reach retirement age, don’t let them withdraw them before then for any reason | Chris |
| Increase the age of entitlement NOW. | Ronald |
| Increased age of eligibility | Peter |
| Keep retirement at 65. | William Clive |
| Raise the retirement age to 67, make contributions to KiwiSaver compulsory and increase minimum level of employee and employer contribution to 5% each. | Alec |
| follow the Singapore model of low company taxation | lance |
| Follow Rogers Douglas’s platform, he is one politician who has the courage to put the people of NZ first | Neville |
| Move age out by 3 years starting 2027 | Allan |
| Gradually raise the age of eligibility for superannuation, and impliment Sir Roger’s plan | Tony |
| The only thing that needs to be done is to raise the age to 70 years. Keep the pension system as simple as possible and that will keep the management costs down. It is simply not possible to for wage earners to save for their retirement. It never has been. | John |
| We are all living much longer than when the current settings were made. They need updating. And lose the universality for those best able to self support. | Rob |
| Gradually increase the entitlement age to 70. | David |
| We need to gradually increase the age of eledgability | Tony |
| Raise age of entitlement to 67. Plus asset test. | Geoffrey |
| We are up to our necks in an issue that needs sorting now. | Andrew |
| The 1974 Labour proposed pension scheme should have been entrenched and endorsed by the Muldoon government. Instead, because it was not thought of by National, it was scrapped, & as you rightly state, we have been going backward ever since. Next we have the Bolger led National government who had the opportunity but refused to abolish the Maori seats when MMP was introduced. Now we have a National dominant coalition who are proving to be no more than LABOUR LITE, with separatism and an economic disaster becoming worse by the day. Yet still National remain a Major Party, even though they abandoned their foundation principles many-many years ago. Wake up voters of New Zealand, there have been alternative right leaning Parties to choose from yet still you cling to the National label. | A.G.R. |
| Follow the Australian example. It is easy and accumulates wealth for more than one party. | David |
| Bring back Norman Kirks super scheme. Remove tax on overtime .Get rid of all MPs perks some of which continue after they have left the job. They were well paid whilst there so for some of it to continue is a rort . Imagine if all treaty settlement monies had instead been placed in a super fund for all the people of New Zealand it would be a massive amount but oh no its been doled out to the quarter cast mongrels to fund the take over of our country. Cluckson should have the white feather of cowerdice ceremonially placed on his empty dome and then boot him in to touch . 100% in favor of a REFORM for NZ somebody needs to hold up the banner for likeminded people to rally too even if its somenone like Seymour , who knows? When a leader bravely leads the people gladly follow. If your out there, dont put off till 2moro what you can do today. Stand up and fight! | Glyn J |
| reform the money supply system instead! | Murray |
| bigger employer and employee contributions TAXFREE | Pete |
| A compulsory financial commitment during one’s working life to a personal fund | Peter |
| bring in compulsory kiwisaver | david |
| We had to pay part of our salaries in England towards retirement, so why shouldn’t the NZ public. | John |
| It seems to me that the Roger Douglas scheme for retirement savings system reform is the only one in the time available – the sooner it is implemented, the better! | Scott |
| Compulsory super. As it should have been years ago | Dominic |
| Age increase to 67 | John |
| People need to be saving towards their own retirement during their working life. This gives certainty and flexibility to retire when you have enough funds saved. Current situation is not sustainable | Alice |
| We would become a wealthy country again if we simultaneously charged tariffs on imports (bringing industry back to our country again) and cut income taxes. We need strength in leadership, not capitulation to freeloaders | Robyn |
| Increase the retirement age to reflect increases in life expectancy. Then use the ” Douglas Plan” to set up a resiliant scheme for the future. Current arrangements not fit for purpose. | mike |
| Retirement funds e.g. kiwi saver should be compulsory like Australia and retirement age could be extended to 67 as in other countries around the world. Starting from 2027. | Jacqueline |
| For future Generations most definitely. The Sir Roger Douglas Plan is a great starting PLace. We all need to Unite to achieve this !! | geoff |
| For starters with Kiwi Saver you shouldn’t be able to draw down cash in advance for house deposits etc It needs to be ring fenced for the purpose for which ur was intended | Maureen |
| Get rid of tax on the pension | Greg |
| Self funded individuals entitlements (initially underpinned?)with income tested tax relief on contributions | Wayne |
| All savings that are made by workers and invested should be tax free, but no your savings are tax at a minimum 17.5% R W T so you struggle to keep ahead of inflation. Furthermore, reduce the public servants by 50% and the red tape that force local councils be halved. And get rid of jobs for your mates in Government and bring in some new blood that have the energy to change the system. | Ken |
| Start with compulsion. Curb immigration to limit downstream liability; particularly family reunification. | Peter |
| Follow Roger Douglas’ idea to direct a portion of income tax to personalised super savings accounts. | Winifred |
| Retirement age needs extending over a period of time – say 70 in 10 years – = 1 year every 2 years giving people time to adjust | tony |
| Raise the retirement age to 70. | Mike |
| By increasing monthly contributions | robert |
| Compulsory savings. Retirement age to 67 | Chris |
| Yes, Use sir Rogers plan. Using your own paid tax sounds great. If we keep kiwi saver as it is with this tax contribution on top balances would increase massively. | Allan |
| Increase retirement age slowly from 65 to 67 over a number of years so as not to not to damage retirement plans of those who are close to current retirement age. | Peter |
| Raise the age to 67 but doesn’t kick in until now 29 year olds reach 67 | Mark |
| A staggered increase in the pension age is required. Probably a move to 67 which is what the UK did some years ago. | Steve |
| Increasing age of entitlement. Should remain universal. The increasing numbers largely from people living longer – should be able to work longer too. | Steve |
| Reintroduce compulsory superannuation | David |
| Better input from govt | Carl |
| Current system is unaffordable and will require increased taxes – viz. wealth taxes/ death taxes to fund in the future. Increasing income taxes will not be sustainable as the proportion of income earners to retirees declines. | Grant |
| No reason why NZ cant be the Norway of the sth Pacific. Their system works so long as politicons are hand off. Show some mental maturity Forethought. | mike H |
| Yes we should adopt Sir Rogers budget asap, The government must reduce public servants down to a new low level without hanger oners and maori layabouts. | Steve |
| Allow 10% gross income salary sacrifice (ie before tax) and no taxes on super until it is drawn upon. Ditch expensive government superannuation benefits. Raise superannuation entitlement age, allow deductions for health and care costs if means testing. | The Answer is always 6 |
| but how and when and to what extend i am not sure about, as people are living longer I believe that the age of entitlement should be gradually increased (as from 60 to 65 years in the past) | Warwick |
| I was in a couple of super schemes during my employment. They are a great way to save compulsorily, and you don’t even notice the money going out of your pay. | Chris |
| whatever scheme to save is used it has to be future proofed. My $4,000 life insurance policy was big 60 years ago. Worth one years electricity charges now . | Basil |
| Means testing is the way to go. | Peter |
| Compulsory retirement savings would be a good start | Trevor |
| Norman Kirk was a very wise man – Muldoon captured the votes of the greedy. | Jan |
| Start by changing age for entitlement. However major overhaul along Sir Roger Douglas vision worth discussion. | Jim |
| As a matter of urgency yes,but it requires sensible individuals to do it such as visionaries like Sir roger to do it,and not necasarily politicians. | gale |
| REDUCE GOVERTMENT TAX TAKE INTO PERSONAL RETIEMENT SAVINGS | Chris |
| Increase entitlement age for national super. | Neville |
| Reset the 1974 Labour Super scheme with employees and employers contributing 5% each. | Grant |
| Increase contributions from both sides to 5% Retirement to be lifted to 67 over 5 yrs | gary |
| More power to indviduals | John |
| It is our taxation system that needs reforming more urgently than our retirement savings system. If everybody paid their fair share of taxes not just the poor wage and salary worker who is not running a business and has not got a clever accountant as a sidekick then the likes of National Superannuation and other services such as Health which used to be affordable would become more so again. | Gary |
| Adopt Sir Roger’s proposal that Muldoon should have left alone. | Ian |
| Leave people alone. They can provide for themselves as they see fit. | James |
| Compulsory super @ 5% with employer contributions and retirement age lifted to 67. | Trevor |
| Increased the age of eligibility and introduce % take on all income to provide a fund for the future | Mike |
| Yes, BUT, the NZ problem that is never confronted is the grossly obscene govt size. Reduce that by 50 % and convert these people producing stuff we sell to the world and then our problems become more manageable. No business can survive with 10 Bosses and 1 worker. | Noel |
| Raise the qualifying age and move progressively to personal retirement accounts. | Gerry |
| I am not an economist but a serious look at Maggie Thatcher’s system would be good | Gareth |
| First of all: the provision that everybody coming here is entitled to a pension no matter if they had worked in our economy and contributed to society or not. That has to stop. If immigrants bring in their families, they have to be able to provide for them, not the state. Second. A pension scheme like they used to have in Germany: You pay automatically into a state pension fund from the moment you enter the workforce and earn a wage. At the end of your working life you are entitled to a state pension according to what was paid in. If there are shortcomings not caused by deliberately abstaining from work there is still a provision to top up that pension. | Michael |
| Make (some form of) KiwiSaver compulsory. | Mike |
| Compulsory for everyone with employer adding 1% as well. | Jim |
| Not particularly viable over the long term. People are living longer so raising the retirement age slowly makes sense. | Henry |
| I would not take any advise from Roger Douglas, just look at the massive mess he left behind he should be left in the wilderness where he belongs | Les |
| Bring in a compulsory personal retirement savings scheme along the lines of the CPF scheme in Singapore. Contributions by employees and employers. Yes we are late to dothis but it’s never too late. | Frank |
| Now | Wiremu |
| It would take too long to say how. However, it is not possible for it to continue as it is. | Chuck |
| increase the starting age | Thomas |
| reintroduce compulsory Superannuation | Ian |
| Increase the age of entitlement | Des |
| Follow Sir Roger’s plan! | Grant |
| got no business being there. | Gerhard |
| steady age increase commencing next year | richard |
| Remember why it was first introduced. It is not a today savings account, it is to provide a degree of security in your retirement years. | Roy |
| I am a retired military person age 75. I have always believed that the Govt pension should NOT be paid out to people who are still getting paid. It is supposed to be for retirement. People I know earn heaps and still receive it. | Barbara |
| compulsory increased savings through the employer/employee scheme | Allan |
| Make superannuation payments tax free and raise the entitlement age to 67yrs old | Brian |
| It is very simple – just copy how Australia change the age pension (now 67 over a 4-6 year period.) Means and Ansett test the pension. No tetirement – no pension. Then start a super scheme like Australia has – started at 3% of salary now about 11% of salary going in to a fund of your choice. When – started now. | Robert |
| A compulsory retirement savings scheme is the only credible answer. | Trevor |
| I would like to see a gradual privatisation (not corporatisation as was done before). Any private entity should be allowed to offer competing services against the State, and anybody who buys into one of the private schemes is granted a tax exemption for the amount of their contribution. The goal would be to eventually completely open the market to non-State entities and remove the State from the equation. | Andrew |
| Adapt Sir Rogers plan | Colin |
| i believe a universal pension should be PHASED IN..over a period of years to allow retirees to phase out of work. some jwork is too hard after 65 years,but could be continued if part time…accompanied by a percentage of superannuation-over say 5 years. | ken |
| Make it compulsory | Ihaia |
| Do as suggested by our late Social Credit MP. Allow people who wish to, to put off received Super for some years, received nigher Super thereby. | Geoffrey |
| Return to a compulsory superannuation scheme as in the Kirk era. | John |
| Our taxes paid throughout our working lives easily cover a pension THREE times the current rate. Guvmint must keep their grotty little fingers OFF what we have paid for | mike |
| The only treaty document that should be adopted today is the one by respected Maori leader Sir Apirana Ngata way back ! | Andrew |
| Simply because the present system is unaffordable. Will a future government have the courage to make the huge change that is necessary? It seems clear that successive governments for the last 50 years have failed to address the issue. I have the feeling that the present government will have the courage to change things too much, based on the history of centrist governments and there resistance to major changes. | Laurence |
| It would most fair to have a personalised super account as Sir Roger has suggested. Hard workers would be well taken care of by the sound of it. | sandra |
| Kiwi Saver needs to be made compulsory for everyone. The current opt out ability is leaving some without anything other than National super. Self employed and those on commission should be included in the scheme. | Rod |
| Norm Kirk’s original plan. | Mike |
| By taking politicians fat salaries and pensions off the bludgers. | doug |
| Compulsory 4% min KS from every $ earned by everyone from age 12 and Govt contribution at 4% , or evidence of alternative private scheme which achieves the 4% min. | Marilyn |
| yes it does the way the system is now young earners need to be saving fast, time waits for no one… | jim |
| The age of qualifying for the pension needs to be increased to at least 67 immediately and preferably 70. People are living much longer now and working much longer ( 70 is now very common) and the pension age should reflect that fact . Each successive generation works and lives longer ( on average ) and this MUST be reflected in the pension entitlement age . Further, reproduction rates have fallen to less than replacement levels , meaning the load of funding the age pension will become more and more of a burden on the working population. Everything is pointing the same way the pension entitlement age must be increased to reflect these changes / facts. My view – to age 70. | Hugh |
| As in many other countries, institute personalised compulsory savings accounts for superannuation. | Donald |
| Compulsory savings but leave at age 65. | Joan |
| Yes. But first look at reviewing our electoral system. Then start Superannuation reform by changing Superannuation of MP’S. Lets not have any Political party involved in Reiew | Frank |
| Compulsory Super | Jerry |
| Yes .will become unaffordable . Stop people collecting super as well as working . Ensure Tea Party maori do not reduce maori super retirement age ,beware Labour will introduce it if they ever get treasury benches again . | Ray |
| Ponzi NO! Give the problem to Brook Van Veldon. There is a politician with courage & common sense. A rare mix. | douglas |
| Compulsory kiwisaver, and remove tax advantage after first $25k achieved. | Dave |
| Along the lines suggested by Sir Roger Douglas. | Peter |
| Yes it does. Start with raising the contribution levels progressively to at least match Australia. Raise the eligibility age progressively to 68. | David |
| Lift the age of entitlement to reflect the increase in life expectancy since the age of entitlement was raised to 65 years. | Terry |
| Increase retirement age BUT allow pro rata early retirement for lower amount. Ramp up KiwiSaver with at least SOME compulsion. | Geoff |
| There has to be a full inclusive reform. First the 80% that super is currently needs reviewing to 85/90% as er super only people as re falling behind. Also there needs to be a limit of other super reviewed as I see it those in upper jobe saleries are cashing in on super that has been paid by the Taxpayer, double diping once with Supwr and second their personal super. There need to be a captil gains tax introuced and Implenenter immediatlly. There need to be introduced a soon as the Due Diligence has been comlpted and NOT in four.six years time | Carl |
| By getting all political parties to commit to such a reform – that’s if hell doesn’t freeze over first? | Malcolm |
| Compulsory Saving scheme like Australia | Liz |
| Yes and ASAP | Janine |
| Similar changes to the Australian system. | S |
| It%u2019s a shame the Cullen fund was abandoned. KiwiSaver should be a cornerstone made compulsory. NZ Super age of eligibility needs be moved in relation to average lifetime (at least a month a year) and means tested. Universality is rubbish. | Brian |
| Gradual increase in age eligibility | Rob |
| Take a look at Australia | Graeme |
| Soon euthanasia will take control of senior extermination. Meanwhile, taxes are needed to fund the criminal population who are reproducing with impunity. This includes the proliferation of their crime gene. Hence why they want to de fund the NZ Police and de populate prisons. NZ or Aotearoa is plummeting towards Zimbabwe under Robert Mugube. Euthanasia or senior extermination will be a natural consequence of this. Perhaps it will be mercy killing. | Eileen |
| Some for of means testing HAS to be done. Many recipients of the pension are still working. That needs to stop for a start. NO pension UNTIL actually retired. | Steve |
| Compulsory supperanuant with reduced tax. Norman Kirk got it right. | Grant |
| Leave our Super alone | Ian |
| Definitely so, asap. | Lee |
| Voluntary personal schemes, llke pensions, medicals, should be encouraged by government through tax relief on payments into those schemes. They save the country from having to provide this additional support for the aged and for public healthcare. Contributions to these types of schemes should therefore be tax free (deducted directly from salaries prior to taxation). | Martin |
| Extend retirement age to 70 progressively over 10 years from 1 April 2027. | pdm |
| The personalised scheme devised by Roger Douglas should be implemented | Carole |
| As much as I am personally opposed to changes to our our Super scheme, the country can simply no longer afford it due to historical decisions. The age needs to be lifted (we are living longer), and payment needs to be means tested based on income. | Phil |
| Your latest column sets out some very prudent aspects of retirement funding, Get govt out of the way from robbing our purses and look after the people who put these robbers in power the first place by their taxation regimes | martyn |
| Means tested. | Jenny |
| If the government really wants people to save, then they need to stop taxing money, that has already been taxed. So all they need to do is say that retirement saving will be taxed at a Zero or very low tax rate, which will incentivize people. Obviously they will take less tax, however National dont have the guts have the guts to disestablish Labours egregious growth of the public service alas. | john |
| Just what has been written | Evans |
| Starting age pushed out to at least 67 plus compulsory lifetime savings into private pensions | Jon |
| Kiwisaver should be compulsory with the portion paid by both employee and employer being Tax Free. | Deanne |
| The welfare system needs to be overhauled first. How can those on lifetime welfare make a realistic contribution to their retirement income? | Rod |
| Raise the age of entitlement now. | Eion |
| Raise retirement age to 67. Increase KiwiSaver contributions. | Tony |
| More private savings. Like Australia has with their rules. Raise the age to 67. People on very high incomes should be means tested. | Coral and John Still |
| It should be compulsory super contributions and regular contribution increases like Australia | Jan |
| The solution given in today’s feature article is the answer. Its success for other comparative countries is beyond doubt. New Zealand would be late to the party, but better late than never, as the principles of wealth accumulation and self-reliance still apply. | Tony |
| Better financial education for everyone. We now have tools available that can how investment and financial growth for the individual for their future. Quality guidance from a quality government department, as well as the private sector (objective versus sales interested) sources. Whether a super schme is compulsory or not it should be encourage. We have Kiwisaver in addition to other investments. Cost benefits defined by the individual, aided by private and public sector support, increasing and adapting means testing to the 21st century along with examples of how personal waste now can exponentially damage people’s futures. | Lawrence |
| Reverse apairtid | Derek |
| We need to have retirement saving systems like Australia does. Australia currently has a retirement age of 67 and has some means testing. In Australia, retirement saving from your wages is compulsory, just as taxation is not optional. | Kent |
| Just as Sir Roger has advocated! | Joe |
| It is time now for a new political party . National are poisoned with “soft corruption” by ostensibly and present MPs. NZ needs a new architect and specification. | RICHard |
| We would have enough money if it wasn’t wasted. You’ve only got to watch parliament to see | Nicola |
| Successive Govts have robbed the pension system when they have overspent and run out of money, It was always self-funding untill they kept robbing it, it needs setting up so there is no way govts can touch it | colin |
| Well I believe it will take some courage which I don’t think this government has as they have not done anything they promised pre election | Peter |
| Encourage people to invest up to 15% of their earnings into super, and make it a tax-deductible expense. Simple! | jan |
| Gradually raise the age of entitlement | Roger |
| `raise eligibity age | John |
| Raise the age of entitlement to superannuation to 67. Means test those receiving it. | Dallas |
| Reinstate the 1974 superannuation scheme and make it binding on future governments to maintain it so they cannot “reform” it by removing the scheme as happened previously | P |
| Remove tax from Kiwisaver contributions, make it compulosory – even for beneficiaries. Allow salary sacrificing for additional contributions. | Barbara |
| Raise the age of receiving it. Have a similar system to Australia of compulsory saving. | Brenton |
| Follow Sir Roger Douglas’s advice. | Joan |
| Sack the extra bureaucrats Stop the net 10 billion going to maoris Reform the superannuation plan | Owen |
| Only by upping to 67 | Anthony |
| Roger Douglas’s reforms should have been introduced years ago. If no party will adopt the plan, then yes, a new political party should be formed. This is too important to be allowed to drift, | David |
| The Coalition has shown itself to be all talk and little action. It is incredibly disappointing that they haven’t removed all of those activists hired by Ardern. Don’t they realise how dangerous these people – and the policies they are pushing – are??? | Maureen |
| Unless Roger gets the full support of a party to introduce the reforms properly, there is a real danger they will be cherry-picked and won’t work as he has described. I think he should set up a Reform Party, but target the left. There must be lots of Labour and Green supporters who are completely dismayed at the direction their parties are now going in and would support the reforms Sir Roger is proposing that would give them real security in old age. | Philip |
| Muldoon should never have cancelled Norman Kirk’s Super Scheme. That rates as one of the worst political decisions in New Zealand history! And congratulations to Sir Roger for not giving up on his vision. | Geoff |
| The current scheme needs to be replaced with the policy proposed by Roger Douglas. It won’t be too different from Kiwisaver except it will cover everyone and be funded through our taxes. Bring it on! | Andrew |