Superannuation Legislation Amendment (Tackling the Gender Super Gap) Bill 2025; Second Reading

O'Sullivan commended the bill for addressing the persistent gender super gap, citing a Super Members Council report that women retire with a quarter less super than men. O'Sullivan noted that while the government's paid parental leave superannuation measure helps future mothers, it does not assist older women, who face gaps of up to 47.8 per cent. O'Sullivan argued that the bill allows couples to split balances voluntarily during their relationship, using existing rollover mechanisms, rather than waiting for divorce proceedings. O'Sullivan suggested this could reduce financial friction in relationships and protect women from economic abuse by ensuring they retain financial security.

Kovacic argued that the bill provides choice, allowing families to manage their finances without government interference. Kovacic highlighted that women over 55 are the fastest-growing cohort of homeless people and that the bill could mitigate this risk. Kovacic criticised the government's economic management and tax policies, asserting that superannuation belongs to Australians who earned it, not the government. Kovacic recalled her own experience of starting from zero after a marriage breakdown and argued that the bill prevents such outcomes by allowing proactive balance sharing.

Ruston supported the bill as a practical reform to tackle the gender super gap, noting that women earn less and take more time out of the workforce. Ruston cited statistics showing a retirement savings gap of 20 to 25 per cent on average, rising to nearly 48 per cent for older women. Ruston explained that the bill includes safeguards, such as excluding defined benefit schemes and capping transfers to prevent gaming. Ruston contrasted the coalition's record of making superannuation fairer with the government's approach, urging support for the bill to demonstrate commitment to women's equity.

Liddle argued that the bill addresses the motherhood penalty and helps women who take time out of work or run small businesses. Liddle detailed the bill's limitations, including exclusions for defined benefit schemes and pension phases, to ensure system integrity. Liddle criticised the government's economic management and debt levels, asserting that superannuation should benefit investors, not the state. Liddle highlighted the coalition's past reforms, such as capping fees and abolishing the $450 rule, as evidence of their commitment to fairer superannuation outcomes.

Henderson supported the bill as a measure of fairness that gives women confidence in their retirement futures. Henderson contrasted the bill with the recent budget, which she described as unfair and damaging to living standards. Henderson argued that the legislation allows families to share superannuation balances annually, supporting women who take time off work to raise children. Henderson urged the Senate to pass the bill to provide security for older Australians and counteract the negative impacts of government economic policies.