What do retirees think of the Wellbeing Budget?

At the end of last month the Coalition Government unveiled its long-anticipated, ‘world-first’ Wellbeing Budget.

Finance Minister Grant Robertson announced billions for mental health services and child poverty as well as record investment in measures to tackle family violence.

“Success is making New Zealand both a great place to make a living, and a great place to make a life,” Robertson told parliament.

In other words, we’re all in this together. Wellbeing for all.

Not so, said National party leader Simon Bridges.

“This is not a wellbeing budget. Families want more money in their weekly budgets for food, petrol and rent. Instead, their taxes are going towards rail, the defence force and trees. Most New Zealanders will be left asking themselves what’s in it for them.”

Of course you could argue that these things are good for all of us, no matter what age or stage. And no one missed the $15.5 billion set aside to cover Super payments, the Supergold Card upgrades and ACC changes, but that did get us thinking… will it make any difference? 

Hardly ‘transformational’, says Horowhenua Grey Power President Terry Hemmingsen.

“I’m underwhelmed by the Budget, there was very little for seniors. We were told by the Coalition that we were going to get an Aged Care Commissioner. There’s no provision for that to go ahead and it’s so disappointing. We seem to have a commissioner for everyone, except for the group that’s heading towards making up 30 percent of our population.”

Hemmingsen hit the headlines last month after he stood up at Grey Power’s AGM and asked Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters why his employer had scrapped its contributions to his KiwiSaver fund. The 70 year old was called back to teaching after he retired and wanted to know whether the Coalition had plans to extend employer contributions to workers post-65.

Despite an encouraging response from Peters – “the Government and the Cabinet is looking at that matter as we speak", nothing has come of it; the Prime Minister saying Mr Peters was merely reiterating New Zealand First policy.

It’s a disappointment for Hemmingsen, to add to his general Budget malaise.

“Yes the Gold Card initiative will make a bit of a difference, it’s certainly nice if you live somewhere you can shop and get discounts, but it doesn’t really apply if you live in rural areas. Over 50% of our members down here don’t have Internet access – partly because of the cost but also the need to upskill that many are simply not capable of. In a way, the Gold Card initiative is a waste of time for them.”

But wait! There’s more.

Superseniors, and almost everybody else has failed to mention this gold nugget:

From July 2020, your NZ Super or Veteran’s Pension won’t be affected if your partner receives an overseas pension.

Associate Professor Susan St John from the Retirement Policy and Research Centre (RPRC) at the University of Auckland says the ‘spousal provision’ in the policy for superannuitants with overseas state pensions has been a source of extreme distress for the 500 or so couples affected.

“A woman could have lived and worked all her life in New Zealand and entered into a second or third relationship later on in life only to find to her horror that she gets less NZ Super, or even nothing, and thus loses her financial independence. Increasingly, men who marry women with long working histories from other countries have been affected as well.”

Dr St John, who was named a Companion of the New Zealand Order of Merit on Queen’s Birthday for her services to social policy, is amazed that the Coalition didn’t seek attention sooner for righting this wrong.

“It’s a completely unjustified policy and I can’t tell you how many hours we’ve spent lobbying it. Being such a contentious issue, some fanfare and spin would surely have been expected. It is very hard to find any indication of it in the Budget documents, and what is there is fudged in a very ambiguous fact sheet.”

Applying the same philosophy of ‘individual entitlement’, the 2019 budget also seeks to close the non-qualified partner (NQP) provision, whereby an under-age spouse could be included in a superannuitant’s entitlement subject to an income test.

And Dr St John is afraid this could prove to be a can of worms.

“Because they’re wrapping the spousal provision change in with it, we await the legislation with trepidation. To me, they’re completely different policies. In some instances the NQP provision is quite legitimate - for example, an older man with health needs with a younger wife who is looking after him. It’s a bit unrealistic in that case to expect that she has to go out to work. The last thing we want to do is to suggest any impediments to getting the spousal provision through. But I’m concerned that the potential debate around the NQP could be complicated and controversial.”

Dr St John says if the spousal provision does get through, it will be a victory for human rights.

“Well-being will be greatly enhanced at very little budgetary cost for this group that has been discriminated against, and vindication of the huge efforts made over more than 10 years. We can rest assured that while progress has been slow, we are finally moving in the right direction in improving superannuation policy in New Zealand,” says Dr St John.

As long as that direction does not include means testing says Hemmingsen.

“I know the economists are trying to talk us into having it means tested like the Aussies do. To them, I say go away, and let us keep our Universal Super. It’s the best model in the world; we just need to support it better by saving.”

The opinions expressed in this article by Horowhenua Grey Power President Terry Hemmingsen do not necessarily reflect the view of the wider Grey Power organisation.