Mrs ELIZABETH GRACE(12.58 p.m.) —Today I want to draw members' attention to a very unrepresented section of the community, the self-funded retirees. This group of elderly Australians amounts to about six to seven per cent of the population. They are about a million people, so I am not talking about a small group but a significant one, living not only in my electorate but all over Australia.

The growth in the number of Australians in the over-65 bracket dictates that some drastic measures have to be taken if the Commonwealth aged pension is to be retained as a safety net for those unable to provide for their own retirement. With living conditions in Australia some of the best in the world, with excellent nutrition and with skilled medical facilities, elderly people's life expectancy is getting longer. People in good health can function quite efficiently into their mid-80s, and a fair proportion will live to be 90 plus. This means that, with a conventional retiring age of 65, people will live in retirement for an average of 20 years. This is a quite significant lifespan at a time when you are no longer getting regular earnings from work.

From talking to groups of self-funded retirees in my electorate, it is painfully obvious that these people feel overlooked and neglected by successive governments. I submit that the time has come to take positive action to attend to these people's needs. I again draw members' attention to the fact that over six per cent of the voting public can easily change a government and one million discontented elderly Australians can be ignored at our peril.

Self-funded retirees are a special group. They are independent and self-sufficient. They do not participate in the welfare system, they are not a burden on the public purse and they are a group of people who have always paid their taxes, abided by the law, conformed to government regulations and generally contributed in their working lifetime to the good of society. In many cases, I am sure they have given much of their personal time—and maybe even their money—to their local community, welfare and political organisations. I believe they should be given a fair go.

Consider some other aspects of this group of a million elderly Australians. In America they are known as the `grey lobby'—an apt and evocative title. Their investments represent a major proportion of national savings. These investments are a major source of funds for national development and, I would like to emphasise again, save the taxpayer many millions of dollars because their investors do not take DSS payments.

In addition, you may find that self-funded retirees have helped their families during times of major unemployment. They often assist with education of grandchildren. They support the Treasury in the payment of their taxes. They do much voluntary work for senior citizens' groups and community groups, such as Meals on Wheels. Also, most have retained private health insurance and, therefore, relieve the strain on the public hospital service.

I was approached recently by a branch in my electorate of the Association of Independent Retirees and had the privilege of addressing a meeting at which more than 70 people attended. I have since had the opportunity of discussing with the president, Mr Bob Sedgewick, and the vice-president, Mr Bill Turner, a number of their concerns of which I seek to inform the House.

The crux of the self-funded retirees' problem lies in the fact that governments in the past have not granted this group any status. There is no classification for self-funded retirees in the government's census form. Can you imagine that we actually have today, in the last stages of the 20th century, a million elderly Australians without classification, unrecognised in law and unprotected in attempting to maintain the lifestyle they have worked so hard to achieve? The first thing we must do for this group is put them on the next and subsequent census.

These Australians see themselves as a great asset to our nation. They ask for recognition of the following basic objectives: tax relief for pharmaceutical expenses, inflation protection for investments, such as tax-free bonds; tax deductibility for private health insurance; simplification of criteria for the seniors card and for the card to be made national so that it is accepted by all states.

I now would also draw the attention of the House to a risk factor involved for self-funded retirees. Unlike those who live off the state, who receive a regular fortnightly payment which is indexed for inflation, self-funded retirees have no mechanism open to them but to invest in income producing marketable securities. Fixed interest securities are subject to variable interest rates and ordinary shares are subject to market movements, the profitability of the company and the generosity of the directors. Self-funded retirees do not have the security of a defined income or of cost of living adjustments.

In the taxation area these people are taxed as if they are still working. Only those with incomes under $20,000 have recently received a tax rebate equivalent to that available to pensioners. Furthermore, they have concerns that the current policy is gradually destroying one of our greatest resources—it is not encouraging current wage earners to save for their retirement. The follow-on from this is the attitude of the younger generation to saving. They are often heard to say, `What's the use of saving? We will be better off on the pension.'

It is painfully obvious that these one million elderly Australians need attention. They need a member of the government through whom their requests and suggestions can be funnelled. I suggest to the House that a minister be appointed to look after the interests of self-funded retirees. Obviously, with such a large group of people, their problems will spill over to many departments. Therefore, the appointment of a minister to intervene for them, to coordinate all their needs and requests is warranted. Furthermore, an appointment of a minister would be recognition of their status in the community.

As I said earlier in this speech, the self-funded retirees have nowhere to go, no-one to represent their cause or interests. Mr Deputy Speaker, consider the Aboriginal people who number around 300,000 and have a full-time minister, consider the pensioners who have the Minister for Social Security; but self-funded retirees, who number one million, have no minister, no representative, no-one to talk to and nowhere to go.

This group of elderly Australians have never had recognition, yet they are deserving of as much recognition as pensioners, veterans, Aboriginals, migrants, sportsmen, sportswomen, small business, defence personnel, and families, all of whom are recognised and have ministerial representation. These Australians are not a burden to the community; they are not a burden on the welfare system; they are not wealthy—and the longer they live the poorer they get.

I shall end by drawing the attention of the House to the fact that one million voters can easily swing an election, and it would be calamitous if they were turned into an electoral burden. Action to help self-funded retirees in a meaningful, ongoing way should be taken and should be taken now.