Mr RIPOLL (Oxley) (15:37): If you ever needed more evidence that this is a government completely confused not only about its role in government but also about superannuation, we just had it all. Ten minutes of all sorts of speeches smashed together, not once talking about superannuation—one of the most important issues that faces the Australian people—for an ageing population, budgets or the economy. It is one of the most important matters that face us as an economy, but they did not mention it once. I, on the other hand, am very proud to talk about our history on superannuation. Not only have Labor created super for ordinary working Australians and making sure that we add to the national savings pool in our country but we have also created a super that underpinned our ability to sustain during the global financial crisis, with a country of just 24 million people, the No. 4 spot for the country with largest funds under management in the world. We have a national savings pool of around $1.84 trillion—I will repeat that: trillions dollars—because 20-plus years ago it was Labor who structured and put forward one of the most important economic policy decisions that this country would ever make. That was called Superannuation Guarantee. It is on the public record, and in Hansard, that it was the Liberals, and Tony Abbott then in opposition, who opposed superannuation every step of the way. This is a government that continues to oppose it. Only just recently, on 25 September 1995—recent enough—Tony Abbott said this: Compulsory superannuation is one of the biggest con jobs ever foisted by government on the Australian people. How wrong he was then and how wrong he is today. How could he ever have had those views? It is clear that there is just purely an ideological hatred against superannuation. You would have to ponder the thought of what that means and how that has come about. Why would the Liberal Party and the National Party—it is very, very odd: why would there be this ideological, pathological almost, hatred of superannuation? What it does for our country and what it does for ordinary working Australians is just give them an opportunity to have some independence in retirement, have a decent retirement. Not a wealthy retirement— Mr Neumann: Have some dignity. Mr RIPOLL: Absolutely dignity! There is still not enough there, and this is really what is before us here today. Even though we have had a bit over 20 years of Superannuation Guarantee and workers' retirement savings building to a reasonable but very modest position, it is still not enough. That is why, when we were in government, we moved to have superannuation raised from nine per cent to 12 per cent. How can anyone argue against that? We heard the shadow Treasurer talking about Craig Meller from AMP before, talking about the importance this has not only for working men and women but also for the national economy, for the budget. When will this government acknowledge the fact that by virtue of Labor's Superannuation Guarantee policies over the past 20 years the budget saves $7 billion every single year? Seven billion dollars less expended on the budget, on the taxpayer, because we have Superannuation Guarantee and more people saving for their retirement. This should be something that is celebrated. Mr Brendan O'Connor: It should be bipartisan. Mr RIPOLL: It should be completely bipartisan, celebrated by every single person. But there is one thing I do understand really, really clearly, as do the Australian people and as do Labor—that is, while the Liberal Party and the National Party have an ideological hatred of Superannuation Guarantee, they know they tread a very fine line because they know the Australian people do not agree with them, do not side with them. The Australian people actually understand that they need to save for their retirement. So when we hear the government, the Liberal Party and the National Party, talking about tearing down superannuation, getting rid of the low-income superannuation contribution—one of the smallest but most significant steps to help ordinary working Australians who earn less than $37,000 a year to save for their retirements—you have to ask the question: why would this government be opposed to that? What is it about the Liberal Party, in government and in opposition, that is so pathologically opposed to ordinary working people— Mr O'Dowd interjecting— Mr RIPOLL: Including people in business, including people in small business, because they save for their retirement too. A lot of them do it through retail funds and industry funds and they do it through their fund managers; they are the beneficiaries of Labor's policies as well. But it is this government, the Liberal-National parties government, that will tear this down. The evidence is clear. It is clear to all Australians; when will it become clear to the government?