Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Full Day's HansardDownload Full Day's Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Tuesday, 30 November 1965


Mr BOWEN (Parramatta) .- I move -

Omit "to the person or his dependants", insert " to, or for the benefit of, the person or his dependants or by the transfer of that amount to another fund in which, as a result of the transfer, the person acquires, or his dependants acquire, as the case may be, a fully-secured right (including a contingent right) to receive superannuation benefits, being a right that is not less valuable than the first-mentioned right ".

Clause 5 proposes to insert a new section 6a into the principal Act. That proposed new section provides that the right of a person or of his dependants to receive superannuation benefits from a fund shall be deemed to have ceased at a particular time. The significance of it depends upon the fact that clauses 9, 17 and 23 of the Bill propose to insert new provisions in the principal Act relating to superannuation funds. Each of these provisions make certain consequences flow where the right of a member ceases during the year of income. For example, the new section 23f which is proposed in clause 9 requires, to state the position broadly, that where the right of an employee to benefits has ceased, then his benefits must be allocated amongst the remaining employees in the fund. Proposed new section 6a provides that the right of a person or his dependants to receive superannuation benefits shall be deemed to have ceased if, by virtue of the terms and conditions applicable to the fund at that time, the right of the person or his dependants to an amount that has accrued or that could accrue from the fund ceased at that time otherwise than by payment of that amount to the person or his dependants.

This proposed new section overlooks the case where an employee has transferred to other employment and where the trustees of the original fund have transferred the assets covering his benefit to the trustees of the superannuation fund connected with his new employment. It is an increasingly common procedure in modern times to provide in superannuation deeds that trustees may transfer assets to another fund if the trustees of the other fund have power to accept them, so that where an employee accrued from the old fund may accrue transfers, all of the benefits that would have from the new fund. Where a transfer of this kind occurs it should not be treated as a cesser. Indeed, the trustees of the original fund would not be in a position to allocate the assets among the other employees remaining in the old fund, because they would not retain the assets.

So I put forward my proposal, which - provides that there should be excluded from cesser not only the cases where there has been payment to the person or his dependants but also those cases where, as a result of the transfer of the amount to another fund, the person or his dependants acquires a right to superannuation benefits not less valuable than the previous benefits. I commend the amendment to the Committee.







Suggest corrections