Paul Keating says Joe Hockey's FHB super idea will compound ageing problems
Paul Keating, the architect of Australia's universal superannuation scheme, has said it was a bad idea to allow first home buyers to dip into their super savings.
"Any meaningful housing deposit taken from the accumulated savings of younger savers would effectively eliminate or near eliminate the base from which the important compounding [of earnings] would otherwise occur," Keating wrote in a column for Fairfax Media.
The former prime minister Paul Keating also warned that if Australians could dip into their super savings at an early age, it would increase pressure on the federal government's aged care budget.
"The key to wealth accumulation in retirement savings is compound earnings," Keating noted days after the Treasurer Joe Hockey raised the prospect of allowing people to dip into their super.
Joe Hockey called for public debate on making super more "flexible" during people's lives.
In an opinion piece, Paul Keating accuses the Liberal Party of attacking Australia's super system for ideological reasons.
"The Liberals have always hated national superannuation for the broad workforce," Keating writes.
"Superannuation for them is fundamentally an ideological matter.
"Just like Medicare, the Liberals object to the universality of Medicare and they keep having a go at it, like the recent attempt to require a co-payment to doctors.
"They have now dropped off that because the going got too rough for them.
"So that having failed, they are back at it again at super – the other great universal scheme.
"But instead of saying they oppose it ideologically, and arguing their case intellectually, the Treasurer will try to reach the same outcome by masking his real intentions as a professed concern for homebuyers."
"This idea is certainly not an innovation and is not responsible enough even to be considered a thought bubble."
He wrote that proposals floated by the Treasurer would breach the principle of "preservation" of superannuation accumulations and would destroy universal retirement savings at its core.
"Breaking what is now a national consensus on the principle of preservation, where savings cannot be drawn down till age 55, would amount to the wilful destruction of one of the best retirement systems in the world."