Page 1070 - Week 04 - Thursday, 29 March 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I now come, however, to what may be considered criticisms of our own report or worries about our own report. We did not address these because some of these worries have arisen since our report. This is very much about the needs of the ageing. I would like to put before the Assembly the question of superannuation for people over 65 and people over 65 staying in the work force. I understand that the present Federal Government makes it impossible for people over 65 to continue to roll over their earnings, for example; yet surely we should recognise the very great need in our society in the next 10, 20, 30 years to recognise that people over 65 are not on the scrap heap.
Our main way to keep such people off the scrap heap is to welcome their continuation in the work force; therefore to welcome their continued pay, their continued possibility for superannuation, their continued possibility in a society with equal rights to have all the rights of people under 65 in the work force. I am very sorry that our committee did not address this. Perhaps the Social Policy Committee could take that on as a possible area of concern - that is, the rights of people over 65 in the work force, vis-a-vis finance, superannuation pay, roll-overs and so forth.
At the moment there are often provisions for automatic compulsory retirement. I think our society will have to readdress that matter. We will have to think: should people be put on the scrap heap at 65? I want a resounding "no" from this Assembly on that question. Rather, there should be terms of work which allow for the possibility of continuing to work after 65 in the way that people have before. I quite recognise there might come a point at age 60 or 65, or in some cases 50 or 55, where a firm might say, "Is this person really up to scratch? Is this person performing?". I suggest it be asked in those terms of efficiency, not in terms of age. Some people at 40 perhaps should be asked to leave the jobs they are in and find other work, but there are many people in their sixties and seventies and onwards who can continue to work. They must be given equal opportunity.
The question of concessions has been raised. I would like to read into Hansard a letter in today's Canberra Times about concessions on trains. It is by J.P. Wilson from Turner:
Residents of NSW who are 60 years of age or more and not engaged in full-time employment and not a holder of a TC 1 (traveller's concession) card issued by the Department of Social Security ... are eligible for a Concession Authority card ...
I seek leave to incorporate this letter in Hansard.
Leave granted.
Document incorporated at appendix 1.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .