For many years the Retirement Commission, ignoring complaints and evidence to the contrary, has peddled New Zealand Superannuation as:
“
Ministry of Social Development statistics tell a very different story.
Currently some 51,000 superannuitants, 10% of New Zealand residents aged 65 years and over, have their entitlement to the “universal” pension significantly reduced under section 70 of the Social Security Act 1964. A further 7%, for varying reasons, receive nothing at all. Almost 200,000 nonresident retired New Zealanders also receive nothing.
In an interview with The New Zealand Herald (
“A CITIZEN’S PENSION FOR ALL! Existing New Zealand Government Superannuation provides income independent of lifetime incomes.”
NZ Super is not "universal except if you receive an overseas pension".
In the wake of widespread complaint, a single amendment appeared on the Commission’s website:
“If you receive a pension from an overseas government, it is likely to be deducted from your New Zealand Superannuation.”
Despite continuing complaints from the public, the Commission refuses to acknowledge that this likelihood contradicts its claim that NZ Super is universal.
Furthermore, the Commission’s choice of the innocuous-looking phrase “from an overseas government” gives the erroneous impression that overseas pensions are funded by foreign governments - and that the reason overseas pensions are deducted from NZ Super is to ensure that people do not receive two state-funded benefits.
In the September 2006 issue of the Grey Power magazine, the Commission stated:
“The ANZ-Retirement Commission Financial Knowledge survey recently asked a sample of Kiwis whether they thought NZ Super was asset or income tested. Thirty eight percent mistakenly said they thought it was income tested, while 27% believed it was asset tested. NZ Super is not asset or income tested unless you also receive a pension from an overseas government.”
That exception represents a small concession won through public objection to the incessant “NZ Super for all” message disseminated by the Commission and the Ministry of Social Development. The website of Work and Income New
If - as the Commission admits - NZ Super is income-tested for over 50,000
Is the mistake actually the Commission’s? Should the Commission not have written that 38% of those surveyed correctly believed that NZ Super is income-tested for tens of thousands of New Zealanders?
In a legalistic sense, an overseas pension does not constitute an income-test for NZ Super because, in the esoteric world of the Social Security Act 1964, overseas pensions are not considered income. But the Retirement Commission is responsible for advising New Zealanders about their real-life options.
To call NZ Super "virtually universal" is fraudulent.
The Retirement Income Policy Review is the Commission’s three-yearly assessment of government retirement income policies. Input from people receiving overseas pensions is nowhere apparent in the 2007 Review, in which Retirement Commissioner Diana Crossan asserted:
“NZ Super is much admired because it is virtually universal”.
Her assertion exemplifies the contradictions increasingly permeating the government’s social security policy. A system of superannuation which is not available to all qualified New Zealanders cannot be called universal.
The term “virtually” acknowledges the 10% of superannuitants whose NZ Super is reduced on account of their overseas pensions. Yet the acknowledgement has not yet found the front page of the Commission’s website praising
The Retirement Commission is an ostensibly independent Crown agency. It ought to be accountable to the people of New Zealand, giving due weight to public input and publicizing the truth that the nature of New Zealand Superannuation in real terms is far from universal.
To continue to disseminate misleading information on NZ Super is particularly irresponsible given the unfortunate consequences for many people (especially migrants) who only discover the truth when they reach 65 years of age. It leaves the Commission open to the question of whether it is defrauding the