Te Pati Maori says its people should get the pension seven to 10 years before the rest of the population.
It says this would be fair since Maori life expectancy is on average seven to 10 years less than the average for other New Zealanders.
The party leaders say they would make this point very strongly during any coalition talks after the coming election.
Recent polling suggests Te Pati Maori could have a lot of leverage in Government-forming negotiations after the vote.
This issue has arisen after the two main parties renewed their traditional election year wrangling over the age of eligibility for NZ Super.
Labour has pledged to retain the age threshold for NZ Super at 65 for the third election in a row,. National has pledged to gradually raise it, also for the third election in a row.
But Te Pati Maori says the current system is unfair already, and raising the age would make it even worse. Its co-leader Debbie Ngarewa Packer says the important aim is to help her people live in dignity.
"At the end of the day our people deserve to live well in their own land."
Her fellow co-leader, Rawiri Waititi says Maori die seven to 10 years earlier than everyone else, on average.
"So we should be looking at a superannuation rate which is more equitable for Maori, until we can pull up out mortality rates (to the average).
"I am not saying we stay there for ever, let's follow the signs."
Waititi says his party would want a differential even if the age for New Zealand as a whole is kept at 65, which would happen if Labour prevails in the coming election. His party would be even more concerned if National's plan to gradually raise the threshold made any progress.
"We are absolutely opposed to any increase in the superannuation age generally - obviously for Maori it has to reflect our mortality rates - but generally we are opposed to the threshold going up past 65," says Ngarewa Packer.
Waititi says his party's preference would see the age of eligibility for Maori going back to 58, or even 55, especially since many Maori work in manual jobs which take a toll on the body.
"Some of our people don't even make it to 60."
The current debate is based on the affordability of superannuation. National argues it is unsustainable because it will prove too expensive as retiring baby boomers swell the ranks of superannuitants relative to the rest of the population.
Labour insists it is affordable as long as the Government undertakes proper planning.
Much of this is based on the contribution made by the NZ Super Fund, sometimes called the Cullen Fund. This stands at present at $62.4 billion. The most recent budget puts the cost of Super for one year at $21.6 billion. Most people live 15 to 19 years after reaching 65.
78 Comments
The government has put up a great website as follows:
OMG - they need to do some research into why and what the age demographic spread is for Māori mortality vs other ethnicities in NZ. I suspect the higher mortality in younger cohorts of the population of those identifying as Māori might skew the overall average, or headline number.
Policy on the question of 'earlier than 65' needs to dig much deeper than age 'averaging'.
Although I don't disagree that everyone needs to live with dignity in their older age, and that manual labourers of all ethnicities are likely to have a shorter work-span, and perhaps lifespan too - but even on the latter score, more statistical analysis is required.
This is freaking great.👌
Everybody identify as a maori, registered on the Maori electoral roll, and get our super affordable superannuation earlier.
Then we can vote them in and let them run the country. What could possibly go wrong?
Is there anybody in the maori party with a economic brain.
[ Banned for that. This is the among the worst we have ever had on this site. It is depressing we have readers who can't distinguish casual racism from 'humour' - or even hard-core racisim. Ed]
RIP
I always thought that (of all people) Peter Dunne's colourblind NZSuper proposal had the most merit. Give everyone the option of electing to take NZ Super anytime between ages 60 to 70 with adjusted rates.
What person in their right mind would wait until 70. Not logical
Plenty of people happily work past the age of 65 because they actually enjoy their jobs, and/or would gladly work longer to get a larger superannuation payment at 70. Should also be said that many people decline physically & mentally when they stop working, not everyone of course, especially those who are physically worse off while working a job they shouldn’t be.
Under normal circumstances no one can predict their date of death.
Who would defer receiving cash today in favour of something that may never be
This is true
"Who would defer receiving cash today in favour of something that may never be"
We almost all do that every day, it's sometimes called investing.
Most wealthy europeans, at their 60th birthday, would back themselves to make 90, and this policy rewarded people who took it up later.
If there is a break-even date, people can survive without the immediate cash flow, and back themselves to live long past the break-even date, many will take it.
The % of >65 in the NZ workforce increased from 5% to 25% over the last 25 years
If you live near a marae , the truth is a lot worst than the averaging. Many of the ones I think most are basing their opinions on ( obese , sedentary, smokers perhaps) die in their 40's and 50's. 60 would be an achievement for them. many would be on a sickness benefit , but not all. some are hardworking work colleagues , who sucumbed to one disease or another.
I believe they are ethnically more vulnerable to diabetes, Kidney troubles , hepatitis , but could be wrong.
Its just such a terrible waste and shame, especially for the Mokopuna growing up without Kaumātua .
I'll re post this here as I'm basically in agreement.
My reality at late 50s age is to see some of my school mates dying.
I was schooled at only two places both of which had around 30% Maori.
Those mates that have died have worked and paid taxes and the majority have been Maori.
I don't nessacrily think the policy above is the answer but I'm not so sure that getting no return from the tax paid to cover super is at all fair.
With friends like these does the Labour party really need enemies at the moment?
Looks like I'm voting to make landlording great again this year, as the alternative seems even worse.
I am sorry but, did you just realize that?
Vote TOP.
Nice try Raf you're not fooling me
This policy (if you could call it that), was announced some months ago, and widely laughed at and disregarded. Even the media laughed at it (even Jack Tame).
The whole debate started around women living longer than Maori and all men, and so they should receive super last of all right? Yes, that was the conversation. That is how ridiculous this suggestion actually is. It was laughed at all over talk back radio.
Maybe TPM forgot about that and pulled the policy out again by mistake.
In any case, this announcement's only real use is ridicule.
Never going to happen.
National and Act have ruled out these guys, and rightly so. Damage from this is likely to be felt by Labour.
Yep, looks like National won't need to do much campaigning this Election.
Dunno, just because Labour's allies are looking quite trashy doesn't make the stench of NACT any less. It just seems the older I get the more uninspiring both of the main parties get.
I think there are two pretty obvious problems with this. First, why stop at ethnicity? Men die on average 3-4 years earlier than women. Should there be different pension ages for men and women?
Second, it seems to confuse correlation with causation. Men die earlier than women in part because they are men - there is evidence that testosterone levels have something to do with it, for example. But I take it no one is claiming that Maori life expectancy is lower due to biological factors. Rather it's to do with things like worse access to healthcare. Wouldn't it be better to spend money on things like improving healthcare access for Maori so that they are less likely to die at a young age, than on giving the pension earlier?
Agreed, let's make men retire 3 years earlier than women, also lets increase the retirement age for Japanese since they live longer than white europeans...... how crazy are they to actually suggest this? It really boggles the mind that a NZ political party (not random one tha's' never been in parliament) would suggest something like this....
Maybe, just maybe, those who die earlier than others might be due to lifestyle factors. Maybe personal responsibility and prioritising one's health over things might have something to do with it?
This is getting out of hand.
Every person is a human being.
Ever person gets to choose their lifestyle choices.
Those lifestyle choices lead to consequences. Certain lifestyle choices have consequences of lower life expectancy.
Here's a dumb idea, let's heavily tax unhealthy (high fat and suger) food instead and let people choose their death v cost benefit lifestyle in conjunction with a rebate for lower cholesterol reading at 60.
I used to be a fan of Nutrigrain for breakfast. I'm sure they have added extra sugar overtime, such that it's now quite sickly. Switched to Weetbix so I can sugar it to my own taste. I'm sure with a sugar tax - manufacturers would stop excess loading of their products real quick.
But..colonisation.
Come on! You are welcome to critique the policy, but you may not make smears or triggering comments. Many such comments have been deleted already. You risk being banned unless you make adult, considered comments to the issues in this article.
Like the adult, considered policies TPM comes out with, right? (sorry, I couldn't help myself)
Ka pai David.
A while back I was in a rug shop deep in the souks of Marrakech, sipping a mint tea while the owner proudly displayed his ware. At the end he asked me which was my favourite. That one I said. After a few minutes awkward silence I felt obliged to ask how much it was. US$5,000 he said. Sensing I wasn't going to part with $5k for his rug he asked me what I would pay. I'll give you US$100 for it I said somewhat embarrassed. Done he said. And that's how I paid US$100 for a US$10 rug.
Many Maori do not align themselves with the more radical political fringes, not actively anyway. But they have forged the way for many of the cultural, social and economic benefits Maori enjoy today. Rawiri won't get his Super age reduction, but he will get something and he has "anchored" National and Labour. The bigotted comments here may just be too thick to see the game that is being played.
He will be lucky to get 1% of the vote, and he won't be part of the next government. He will be moaning from the sidelines, but he won't get much air time since the media won't be paid to broadcast this rubbish anymore. He will be shunned.
I'll bet you $500 TPM poll >1% on election day, money to the charity of our choosing.
Didn't say they won't. I said they would be lucky. They are currently on 2% at most. They could easily fall away.
Māori would be stupid not to vote for them. I think they will poll quite well from this. Of course it won’t work in practice, as tax payers can’t afford to pay now.
They dont need to when they have there own electorate seats.
And the game they are playing is only in your mind.
Inorder to get a win in politics you gave to get onto the top table...
Lets see how this plays out at election time.
Not going to happen.
Many traders could learn a lot from the souks of Morocco.
Ethnicity is self defined in NZ. What would stop me from switching to Maori at age 59? Ethnicity is also unlimited, one can be multiple ethnicities. Would we need to go back to % blood or what?
Sorry David, Just publishing this article on a site like this is triggering in itself.
Remember, this country is divided enough as it is, without fiscally dumb and emotionally provocative articles making headlines in sites like this.
You get what you give.
We are not going to refuse to cover issues that go to the heart of how our economy works, and the distortions that are caused. There will be a wide range of them. But we can ensure that the commenting on them remains civilised and respectful. You may not agree with the TPM policy, but you have to comment on it respectfully. They have a point. And it needs to be debated. But the debate mustn't be social-media-style, which isn't really debate.
they have a point ? - please explain.
and since when overtly racist proposals deserve respect ?
That's all fair and true but emotions are part of the fabric of life and to deny a radical reply to a equally radical idea or proposal is just denying the reality of society's make up and free speech
Plenty here racially comment on many white persons comments without rebuke. Why? Because the white colonists deserve it?... maybe?
Either way "water find its own level weather it's dirty or clean"
whether
The big question is that
Will any affirmative (or de-affirmative) actions toward a specific race be any beneficial to all New Zealanders collectively as a whole?
TOP's UBI solves all of this.
Good point - it sure does.
[ Profiling smear removed. Don't do it. Ed ]
You can't say that Zwifter!
But I thought Maori were had physical specimens that were of warrior blood. And could wipe the floor with any other ethnicity. Strange at coming up to 60 I have just hand mixed ten cubic meters of concrete over the last week. That's 250 to 300 barrows of concrete for the urinated
Today on the things that didn't happen. Does ReadyMix not deliver where you live?
I mean if you were doing it 8 hours a day non stop over 7 days that's a barrow every 12 minutes. To shovel builders mix/cement, water it, mix it with a shovel and pour into place. If you said you used a 180l electric mixer we might believe you.
This might backfire on any party that has not ruled out a coalition with TPM.
If this goes through i'll have to go do the genealogy thing and see if I can find some Maori blood in the family tree. Or can I simply identify as Maori? 23 and me report good enough?
Boom times for Genealogy researchers coming up (maybe).
Then you have to ask what is a maori? And what is a -ummh - a non-maori.
The idea of there being two distinct groups is just not true. Maori are not the Maori of 1840, and I am not an Irishman of 1861. It's different now.
So you have to have an arrangement that is different for each and every one of us. Calculated on some basis.
Or it's the same age for everybody.
I vote for the latter.
Debbie Packers mum is Irish, as is Elizabeth Kerikeri's.
So the Irish are all good as they come under "our people"
I don't believe that there is any genetic reason for a lower life expectancy for Māori, for example poor white men in Glasgow Scotland have a lower life expectancy than NZ Māori. Rich Māori will have a higher life expectancy than poor Pakeha. However many Māori do end up in manual jobs due to poor educational outcomes and inter-generational poverty (often caused by historic injustice). Wouldn't it make more sense to have lower retirement ages based on occupation and/or income, with those in higher paying white-collar jobs retiring later. It could get quite complicated.
I've sometimes head it said that labourers or those in physically demanding jobs should be bale top retire with pension earlier than those in office jobs. What a nonsense. Some people who work in physically demanding jobs are incredibly fit and get the many benefits of physical exercise and being outside in fresh air and sunshine for many hours every day while those who lead a sedentary life sitting in front of a screen are pasty, flabby and generally look unwell. And we could get on to the stressors of working for an unreasonably demanding boss, or for an unethical company.....and you soon see there are all sorts of stressors which, long-term, could potentially have an effect on one's health and well-being. Any move to pay super early to any group is fraught with issues and arguments, both for and against.
Good points.
They will be phyiscally fit , but their knees and hips will be shot. I'm starting to feel the effect on mine at 58 . Plus Cataracts , and shot hearing, buggered backs and so on.
I don't buy the manual worker argument. Many folk I know in those white collar jobs just burn out about age 65. It varies of course.
In a real way they just can't do it any more. Wake up in the morning, important things to do, but just can't make themselves do.
Race based politics have never delivered lasting good for citizens of any country anywhere.
""At the end of the day our people deserve to live well in their own land.""
should read
At the end of the day all New Zealander deserve to live well in their own land.
Utilitarianism is dead.
I actually think this is a good idea for reasons I am too scared to get into however it would be better to pay an early superannuation than an unemployment benefit. It's demeaning to make older folk whose bodies are broken and tired to go through hoops for a benefit. Psychologically it could be beneficial and even lead to people looking after themselves a little better.
Maturity and aging does appear to vary for people. ChatGPT refused to elaborate as to whether or not this has been observed in different groups of humans. I'm now only months away from getting super and yet I feel like I'm 30. No aches, no pain, no spectacles. I am blessed to have healthy genes and a fairly privileged home life although earlier today I recalled, not without some pain, the many times I was the second to last chosen for the rugby team or put on reserve. Even though I am very slightly above the male average height it took me a long time to get there.
Zach, in order to qualify for a work test exemption on grounds of genuine illness or disability, do you think its also demeaning for younger folk to have to go through the same hoops and roundabouts in order to qualify for a benefit? What is the difference? Age?
To me, your comment has a whiff of agism.....
Yes, we should try to be more generous in regard to any illness or disability regardless of age.
Don’t NZ Asians live the longest? They can retire at 90 thanks. Women also live longer. Asian women don’t get to retire until 95.
This woman should advocate for the life expectancy discrepancy to be addressed through a targeted campaign on how to best avoid getting type two diabetes and the dangers of smoking. Instead she advocates this nonsense.
"At the end of the day our people deserve to live well in their own land."
Do the many who have moved to Aussie and deserted their homeland qualify for an early NZ pension?
Maori party are racists. This just proves it.
Propose the Pakeha Party and see if its accepted. Some A hole wanted the All Whites banned because of the name
Did they mention the All Blacks? Times change, I wonder what will be offensive or insensitive in 50 years that we can't imagine now.
Funny how people can’t see the similarities isn’t it. Maybe an aryan party…..oh can’t already been tried! You had to prove your race to them too apparently.
Can't you see, though, that if you need a party or organization to specifically defend your ethnic interests you are in a vulnerable position? I don't think you would really want to be in a position where you need such a party for yourself.
It's fortunate to be able to think of oneself as an "everyman" a global citizen, no?
Well, the party was formed to work for the interests of the Māori people:
Te Pāti Māori is the assertion of our mana motuhake and our liberation. As a Māori political movement we are guided by our tikanga and will always fiercely advocate for the interests of our whānau, Hapū and Iwi in Parliament and Government.
We envision an Aotearoa Hou where Tangata Whenua, Tangata Moana and Tangata Tiriti together will realise the true intent of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
With the world become more and more mixed through immigration, I'd like to think we are becoming more equal.
What place is there anymore for 'special' treatment of one ethnicity over another?
We should rightly preserve the history of the Maori people, as we should with the history of all peoples.
This seems to be primarily motivated by the desire to stoke anger amongst Maori at the response of Whites to this proposal.
The weird obsession with Outcome Sameness (Equity as they call it) is really driving this to strange logical conclusions. Everyone effectively has the same opportunity in this day and age in most matters, yet disparities remain.
How much money, effort and policy can be imposed to make outcomes 'equitable'?
I read the article three times and they come across as thoughtful. They are opposed to raising the super age for all people and only advocate lowering it for Maori until life expectancy is improved.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.