Senator CROSSIN (3:38 PM) —I also rise to take note of the answers given by Senator Coonan today. It has been a very sad, feeble attempt by members of the government to defend the answers that were given by the minister today—in fact, the lack of answers. The question that I asked was a very clear and straightforward question: could the minister please clarify for us what she said last Wednesday in the Senate in comparison to what was written in the Financial Review last Friday? Senator Coonan has to always come from a point where she has to defend what she believes is some sort of personal attack, although she is pretty good at, perhaps, being able to give that back. I noticed today that the only thing thick about what was happening in this place was her ability—

Senator Ian Campbell —Have you apologised to her husband yet? Have you apologised to Andrew Rogers yet? That was a personal attack.

Senator CROSSIN —to understand exactly what my question was about. She quite clearly did not understand that we were simply asking for a simple explanation in relation to what she said last week in the Senate and what was written in the Financial Review.

Senator Ian Campbell —You were simply attacking her husband last week. It was scurrilous and disgraceful and you were a part of it.

Senator CROSSIN —Today I want to actually take note of the very first question we asked yesterday, which was in relation to this government's little secret agenda to try and make sure—

Senator Ian Campbell —This is a scurrilous and disgraceful fraud—without a leader, without a policy, without an agenda.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT —Senator Ian Campbell, you might show some constraint.

Senator CROSSIN —That will be the day, when Senator Campbell can show some constraint. What we uncovered today was the government's secret agenda to try and make sure that everybody is going to work for as long as they possibly can, to try and creep the working age up to at least 70. The very first question on this day was asked because, again, we wanted to get this minister to clarify for us exactly where the government are going in relation to their proposals to increase the preservation age to 65 or 70 years, as well as phasing out the age pension. We had, of course, straight off the mark, a minister who was prepared to duck and weave on the issue. She was not prepared to clearly outline for us what the plans of the government are.

Senator Ludwig —Nor deny it.

Senator CROSSIN —That is right, Senator Ludwig. She was not prepared to deny it at all. This is a government that has made it quite clear that it wants Australians working much longer, regardless of their circumstances. Given the kind of signalling that we have had from government ministers over the last few months, it is no doubt that we, along with the Australian public, should expect—any time now, I suppose—that this government will announce an increase in the preservation age to 65 or 70 years as well as the phasing out of the age pension. This will probably happen, we suspect, in the 2003 budget. The government is doing this because it refuses to do anything to deal with the adequacy of retirement incomes. So what it wants to do is make sure that more people work for longer. It wants to ensure that Australians work until they are at least 70 years of age.

Have a look at the measures that are already in place. The preservation age was increased by the Liberal government from 55 to 60 years as part of the 1997 budget. They increased the age at which a person can contribute to super from 65 to 70 as part of the 1996-97 budget. Then, as part of their 2001 election commitments, it was increased to 75 years. Let us have a look at some of the minister's comments, which will show quite clearly why we believe the government have an agenda of getting Australians to work till they are 70. It is an agenda of increasing the preservation age of superannuation from 60 to 70 years, which means you will not be able to touch that superannuation component until you reach that age. On 21 December last year on the AM radio program, the minister said:

So there was the first warning bell that went off. Then, of course, we had the Treasurer, Peter Costello, talking about the increase of preservation age for superannuation from 55 to 60, which is the current provision. On 7 August this year he stated:

He went on to say:

Question agreed to.