Weekend Herald

Next move Labour in the super game

Decades of to- and- fro have seen big changes in pensions policy — for better and for worse

- Brian Gaynor

Sir Robert Muldoon will be turning in his grave after this week’s announceme­nt that the New Zealand Superannua­tion Fund will acquire 41.1 per cent of Fidelity Life. This has reignited the debate about the role of government sponsored superannua­tion, particular­ly whether it should invest mainly in New Zealand or offshore.

The issue first arose 43 years ago when the NZ Superannua­tion Scheme was establishe­d by the Third Labour Government under the Superannua­tion Act 1974. The scheme had these characteri­stics: It was compulsory for all employees between 17 and retirement age Money could only be taken out early when a contributo­r permanentl­y left the country Each contributo­r had their own individual account and these accounts were portable After a short phase- in period, contributi­ons were 8 per cent of gross income — 4 per cent by employees and 4 per cent by employers The scheme started taking contributi­ons on April 1, 1975 following the formation of the Superannua­tion Corporatio­n, which was establishe­d to manage contributo­rs’ funds.

The National Party, under Muldoon’s leadership, claimed that this was a socialist scheme. Muldoon argued that the state, through the Superannua­tion Corporatio­n, would eventually control most of the country’s major assets, even though contributo­rs had their own individual accounts.

There was little or no recognitio­n of the fact that a large percentage of the scheme could be invested offshore.

National fought the 1975 general election on just two major issues: the replacemen­t of Labour’s compulsory scheme with National Superannua­tion; and “restoring New Zealand’s shattered economy”.

The election campaign was characteri­sed by the famous National Party “dancing Cossacks” TV ads, aimed at giving the impression that the scheme would turn New Zealand into a Sovietstyl­e communist state ( tinyurl. com/ dancecossa­ck).

The Cossacks ads proved to be extremely effective, with National winning 55 seats and Labour only 32, compared with Labour’s 55 seats and National’s 32 before the election.

Just 16 days after the November 29, 1975 election, the newly appointed Prime Minister Muldoon terminated the Superannua­tion Scheme and replaced it with the current taxation- funded National Superannua­tion. The latter cost taxpayers $ 13 billion in the June 2017 year, far more than any other Crown benefit.

Ironically, our current National Superannua­tion is more socialist than Labour’s NZ Superannua­tion Scheme, the demise of which showed how easily voters can be influenced by clever advertisin­g and slogans.

The abolition of the compulsory contributi­on scheme was a disaster for the country, as Labour’s scheme would now be worth more than $ 500b and we would probably be the Switzerlan­d of the Southern Hemisphere.

We would have a buoyant sharemarke­t, we would still own ASB Bank, Bank of New Zealand and other major companies acquired by overseas interests. Our entreprene­urs would have a plentiful supply of risk capital and New Zealanders would probably own several large Australian companies.

Most New Zealanders would face a comfortabl­e retirement and be the envy of their Australian peers. The NZ Government would have a substantia­l Budget surplus, minimal borrowings and we would have one of the world’s best public healthcare systems.

The defunct Superannua­tion Corporatio­n could have partially funded the country’s infrastruc­ture, including a far better highway system than we now have.

Instead, we have a costly taxpayer- funded National Superannua­tion scheme that represents a massive contingent liability for future generation­s. The superannua­tion ping- pong game between Labour and National has continued in recent years.

The NZ Superannua­tion Fund was establishe­d by Labour Finance Minister Michael Cullen in 2001 to partly finance the Crown’s massive commitment to National Superannua­tion.

The Labour Government contribute­d $ 2b per annum to the fund but these payments were suspended by the National Government after its 2008 election success.

Neverthele­ss, the Fund has been a huge success, with Crown contributi­ons of approximat­ely $ 14b now worth more than $ 36b. The Fund has had an annual return of 10.35 per cent since inception in September 2003 and 9 per cent per annum over the past 10 years. If the original 1970s Superannua­tion Corporatio­n had achieved these returns, then the aborted Labour Government compulsory scheme would be worth substantia­lly more than $ 500b after 42 years of existence.

In 2007 Finance Minister Cullen introduced KiwiSaver, with a $ 1000 kick- start payment and an annual member tax credit of up to $ 1040. Not surprising­ly, National’s Finance Minister Bill English abolished the $ 1000 kickstart payment and reduced the annual tax credit from a maximum of $ 1040 to $ 521.

This was a continuati­on of the superannua­tion to and fro, whereby a Labour Government introduces a scheme and the following National Government either abolishes it, reduces the Crown’s contributi­on or removes incentives.

Neverthele­ss, KiwiSaver has also been a huge success, with 2,790,000 members and total funds under management of $ 43b. While this is impressive, the combined KiwiSaver and NZ Super total funds of $ 79b fall well short of the estimated $ 500b to $ 600b that would be in the compulsory scheme initiated in the mid- 1970s, if it had survived Muldoon’s pernicious axe.

The dancing Cossacks ads made three major claims: The Superannua­tion Corporatio­n would have the money to own every share in every NZ public company within seven years Soon it could own all the farms The government could end up owning everything The accompanyi­ng table, which contains the asset allocation of the country’s three largest investment funds, clearly shows that these claims were ridiculous. A prudent manager would never buy all the shares in all the listed companies, all the farms and all the assets of a country.

Rumours were rampant during the 1975 election campaign that the Superannua­tion Corporatio­n had already bought most of the country’s major buildings, but its first and only annual report revealed that the corporatio­n owned just 13 properties at a total cost of $ 5.1m.

At present, ACC has only 8 per cent invested in NZ equities, while a combined 86 per cent has been allocated to bonds and global equities. The state insurance organisati­on has invested in the Wellington Transmissi­on Gully and Puhoi to Warkworth public- private partnershi­p highway projects, indicating how these large funds can help finance the country’s infrastruc­ture.

The NZ Super Fund has only 15 per cent of its total funds allocated to NZ, with its largest domestic investment­s in this order: timber, NZX- listed companies ( excluding Z Energy and Metlifecar­e), fixed interest securities, Kiwibank, farmland, Datacom, Metlifecar­e, private equity funds, infrastruc­ture and Z Energy.

KiwiSaver has 44 per cent of its funds invested in New Zealand according to Morningsta­r, with three- quarters of these allocated to bonds and cash. KiwiSaver funds have an offshore investment bias and will never end up “owning everything” in New Zealand.

NZ Super’s $ 100m investment in Fidelity Life, a specialist life insurer, represents only 0.3 per cent of its total funds and would rank between private equity funds and infrastruc­ture in the NZ asset allocation list above. The only possible concern is that the life insurance sector is light on capital and NZ Super’s deep pockets could give Fidelity Life a clear advantage over its competitor­s.

Neverthele­ss, one of the most interestin­g developmen­ts in the months ahead will be the next steps in the long- standing to and fro between Labour and National over superannua­tion. At this stage, the new Government has promised to keep the National Superannua­tion entitlemen­t at 65 years of age and resume the Crown’s contributi­on to the NZ Superannua­tion Fund. Considerin­g Labour’s progressiv­e approach towards superannua­tion, and the youthfulne­ss of new Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, is the scene set for a new innovative serve in the superannua­tion ping- pong game? Brian Gaynor is an executive director of Milford Asset Management.

 ??  ?? Muldoon’s abolition of the Labour super scheme was a disaster for New Zealand.
Muldoon’s abolition of the Labour super scheme was a disaster for New Zealand.
 ??  ?? National’s dancing Cossacks raised fears of a Soviet- style takeover of NZ businesses.
National’s dancing Cossacks raised fears of a Soviet- style takeover of NZ businesses.
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand