While conducting some research independent of my thesis on the
attitudes towards retirement of Australian baby boomers, I discovered
that in fact the baby boomers shed some light on a major theme of my
thesis.
Retirement incomes policy is at the forefront of
policymakers’ minds all over the industrialized world. Australia’s and
Britain’s welfare states, and their retirement incomes systems, are
built on fundamentally different principles and institutional
frameworks. Today, the two systems have developed to include a complex
mix of public and private provision in retirement. Australia has a
social–assistance style welfare state in which retirement is funded
primarily by a means tested age pension supplemented by compulsory
occupational superannuation. Britain has a social insurance scheme in
which retirement benefits accrued are related to labour market
participation, supplemented by a low means tested pension. My thesis is a
comparative study of pensions policy in the two countries.
In Australia, we are seeing a transition from
the age pension as a legitimate method of funding retirement towards an
increasing emphasis on self-funding through superannuation. This is
resulting in a shift in emphasis from the obligations of the state to
the responsibilities of the individual.
Perhaps t he most significant contributor to the
shift to self provision has been the introduction of the compulsory
Superannuation Guarantee in 1992, whereby employers are now compelled to
contribute 9% of most of their employees’ income to an approved
superannuation savings scheme. This has been exacerbated by the
relentless promotion of the ideal of self-reliance as a marker of good
citizenship by the Howard Coalition Government since its election into
office in 1996. The increasing emphasis on self-provision has
contributed to a widespread shift in attitudes towards retirement
incomes and a change in the way we perceive the age pension, from being a
right of citizenship, to a payment reserved for the economically
disadvantaged. This represents a significant re-organisation of the
Australian retirement incomes system.
Recent research I conducted independently of my
thesis sought to explore the attitudes of Australian baby boomers
towards their own retirement and retirement and pensions policy more
generally. What I found was that, in fact, baby boomers, usually defined
in Australia as those born between 1946 and 1961, sit at the centre of
the transition in our normative assumptions about the most fair and
acceptable method of funding retirement.
When baby boomers entered the workforce, the age
pension was the predominant form of funding retirement and most of
their parent’s generation rely on the pension. But in 1992, halfway
through their working lives, compulsory super was introduced and
increasingly, the responsibility has shifted towards the individual to
self-fund their retirement. Baby boomers are therefore the generation at
the centre of this shift in ideology and expectations.
The attitudes of baby boomers towards the funding
of retirement are significantly different from those of their parent’s
generation. However, their historical position and the way that they fit
into the policy trajectory, results in a complex mix of attitudes
reflecting both more traditional ideas about the age pension as a right
of citizenship, and more contemporary ideas about self-sufficiency in
retirement. For example, they are very supportive of the virtues of
self-reliance but still believe the age pension should be maintained.
They think of the age pension as a safety net, to be claimed as a last
resort rather than an automatic right of citizenship, but do not pass
moral judgement on recipients. Their attitudes towards retirement
provision can help us to see the progress of the transition so far, and
help to shed light on the possible development of such a shift in the
future. Moreover, the baby boomers are highly useful as an exploratory
tool in understanding the more widespread impact of policy change on our
normative assumptions about pension provision.