Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party, Minister for Resources and Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I wish tonight to pay tribute to a great contributor to Queensland politics, Alexander Rodney Lockie Wilson—known to most simply as Rod. Rod, unfortunately, passed away last month at just 69 years of age—far too soon for a man who had given much but had much more to give. Rod was a successful pastoralist, an inventor and a great family man. He is survived by his wife Sylvia and their three children William, Zoey, and Eliza. Rod was an unsung hero of Queensland politics, and that is why I want to say a little bit about him tonight: his contribution deserves to be sung. His life is indicative of the thousands of people who are active behind the scenes in politics. They receive no fame and no remuneration, but they work harder than anyone in this game, and sometimes they contribute much more than the professionals. Rod's life, Rod's example, is a tribute to those Australians who are actively engaged in politics and ask nothing for it in return.

My colleague Barry O'Sullivan, who is in the chair at the moment, gave a beautiful speech last week about Rod. Barry touched on Rod's successful business interests, his community work and his love for his family. I wanted to pay tribute to Rod tonight by touching on how I got to know him through his passion for developing better policies that improve people's lives. I met Rod about three years ago, after I moved up to Central Queensland. Rod was in politics for the right reason: to help people. I got to know him because he wanted to help someone else. Rod had employed the same lady as his secretary for over 20 years. She had reached retirement age and could have stopped working and gone onto a pension, but she wanted to keep working for Rod. Over the years, however, it became harder and harder for her to justify the financial calculus of continuing to work. Given the way our pension system operates and its means-tested nature, she could earn almost as much on the pension as she did working for Rod.

Rod wanted to find a solution. He knew that something was wrong with this. Why should someone be penalised for working? He started to develop policy ideas that were kicked around the policy committees of the Liberal National Party. Someone, I think, told him that I might know something about economics, so I got in my car and drove down to the Coffee Club in Gladstone to meet with Rod; the former member for Hinkler Paul Neville and another party member in the area, Ken McGuinness. Rod was passionate from the start. As soon as the meeting started, I knew that I was not going to get out of this lightly. He was the kind of person, like former senator Ron Boswell, who, when he knew something was right, kept driving and driving until he succeeded. Like Ron, I knew he would keep calling and calling me until I delivered what I had promised.

It is people like Rod and Ron who are the engines of the political system. Their energy, their drive and their persistence overcome the inertia of bureaucracy and get things moving. We began to discuss why Australia's pension system was built like it was. At first, I thought there was not much that could be done—surely, we would have to means test the pension, otherwise it would become unaffordable. But I gave Rod a commitment to look into things, and it turned out that Rod was onto something. The best way I can honour Rod and his memory is to relay to the Senate what Rod was onto.

Australia has a comparatively low workforce participation rate for older Australians, at just 12 per cent for those who are aged over 65. This participation rate has increased a little this century, but it seems to have reached a plateau in the past few years. It remains about five to 10 percentage points below countries such as New Zealand, the United States, Japan, Norway and Sweden. Lifting our workforce participation rate for older Australians is probably the single best thing we could do to tackle the economic impacts of our ageing population. A study a few years ago showed that, if Australia had the same mature-aged participation rate as New Zealand, our GDP would be four per cent higher. In per-person terms, that amounts to about $2½ thousand for every Australian, in terms of economic wealth, if we could achieve it. As it stands at the moment, a single pensioner begins losing the pension at the rate of 50 cents in the dollar for every dollar earned over $168 a fortnight. Evidence shows that older workers in Australia are more responsive to changes in wages or their effective tax rates than the general working population. Hence, while policies directed at reducing age discrimination and improving the education skills of older workers have benefits, a substantial lowering of effective tax rates for older Australians could perhaps have the greatest impact.

The question arises: why does a country like New Zealand have a workforce participation rate for over-65-year-olds almost double that of Australia?

What is even more remarkable is that about a decade and a half ago New Zealand's older people workforce participation rate was about the same as Australia's. There is evidence that Australian pensioners want to work more. A survey in 2009 found that one in five Australian pensioners had turned down part-time work because they would have faced a cut in their pension.

While there are a range of differences between New Zealand's system and Australia's, the key difference is that New Zealand's age pension is not means tested. This means that older New Zealanders do not face the punitive marginal tax rates faced by their counterparts in Australia. Instead, the pension in New Zealand is assessable for taxation purposes, so a pensioner in New Zealand faces the same marginal tax rate as any other worker in the system. It makes some sense that your tax rate should not increase just because you turn 65.

Australia has programs to reward pensioners for continuing to work, and they somewhat offset the high marginal tax rates that pensioners would otherwise face. But a study in 2013 found that these are 'so confusing that they may well undermine the very aim of the schemes'. There is no simple solution here. The New Zealand system would be a radical departure from Australia's and almost certainly would be a more costly one for our budget. Much more work would be required on the best policy options for us in our circumstances. However, the point Rod raised with me and others in the Liberal-National Party was certainly a legitimate one. It is thanks to Rod, and people like him, that our democratic system can respond to the needs of the people, and not the priorities of this parliament alone. The more we listen to people like Rod, the better our system will work.

It was an honour to know Rod, and I want to continue to honour him and his memory. The best way that I can do that is to continue his push for a better deal for older Australians. Rod is greatly missed by his family, but I hope they know that his legacy from his political involvement will live on for many years to come. Vale Rod Wilson.