Enter your email to read this article
Read news on any topic, in one place, from publishers like The Economist, FT, Bloomberg and more.

Who thinks raiding super is a bad idea? Many senior Liberals, for a start

Mathias Cormann: “Increasing the amount of money going into real estate by facilitating access to super savings pre-retirement will not improve housing affordability. It would increase demand for housing and, all other things being equal, would actually drive up house prices by more. That is, it would reduce housing affordability, including for first-home buyers. The only effective way to tackle housing affordability is by boosting housing supply, not by boosting demand.” October 2014

Peter Costello: “If you want it to top up people’s retirement, if you want it to save the government money and it has that dual purpose, then you probably won’t allow people to draw down on it for housing.” March 2015

Malcolm Turnbull: “[A] thoroughly bad idea … That is not what the superannuation system is designed to achieve.” March 2015

Malcolm Turnbull, rejecting the idea again as prime minister: “That is the legislated purpose of superannuation, to provide for retirement. That is why the whole system was set up in the first place.” April 2017

Christopher Pyne: “Superannuation has a particular role. It is a retirement income. Our superannuation system is the envy of the world and those people who seek to fiddle with it are putting that at risk and there is no evidence to suggest that, if superannuation was able to be used for housing, that would somehow bring house prices down. There is evidence on the other side of the ledger which suggests that all that would happen, in fact, was that house prices would continue to go up and the person selling the house would simply take that person’s super and increase house prices.” April 2017

Peter Dutton: “I think the PM [Malcolm Turnbull] has got it right. He’s referred back to his previous words on this to say that it’s not good policy and I agree with him.” April 2017

Anne Ruston: “I’ll agree with [Labor MP Nick] Champion … We need to be careful that you don’t pour a bucket of kerosene on a fire. We need to look at all of the measures in total.” April 2017

Sussan Ley: “Young people need their super for retirement, not to try to take pressure off an urban housing bubble, better solved by decentralisation.” April 2017

Luci Ellis: Reserve Bank assistant governor (economic) to Falinski inquiry: “This is a matter for government, but super is there to enhance retirement incomes. If that were to be redirected to spending more on housing, the result would be that people would spend more on housing.” September 2021

The House of Representatives Standing Committee on Tax and Revenue, chaired by Liberal MP Jason Falinski: “The committee recognises that allowing first-home buyers to access or borrow against part of their super to purchase a home would, in the absence of increased housing supply, likely increase demand and lead to higher property prices.” March 2022

John Howard: “Super is for retirement.” March 2022

Jane Hume: “I would imagine in the short term, you might see a bump in house prices.” May 16, 2022

Scott Morrison [when asked about Hume’s admission on the effect on home prices]: “It’s quite marginal. It’s quite marginal.” May 16, 2022