Industry bodies clash over pension age

A proper survey of the population may reveal that a majority of workers are sufficiently health impaired (physically and or mentally) at the age of 65 as to prevent them from contributing to work at the rate of 35 hours per week, given my observations of the sector. Therefore the retirement age should remain at 65.

Being well above 65 years of age and not suffering from any impairments I continue to contribute to National GDP, by choice and I enjoy working! How lucky can one be?

Those who chose to work beyond 65 should be rewarded by re-introduction of the currently discontinued "PENSION BONUS SCHEME" to provide them with a tangible incentive to continue working.

In order to minimise the wastage of retirement savings, a proportion of such money should be mandated for investment at age 65 into lifetime annuities with the capital asset test exempt but locked in till death.

Far too many retirees have the habit of embarking on tourism within Australia and/or Overseas where they simply "get away from reality" and pass their time on vacuous site seeing, thereby blowing their retirement savings. Most have to fall back upon Centrelink support at far too early a time. This applies to retirees from all social classes in my experience. One only has to observe the content of magazines for retirees and from organisations such as the NRMA to observe how the "FASHION" for travel by retirees must be so lucrative to tourism groups.

Additionally, all retirees should be penalised by a "lump sum tax" when handing retirement savings over to family members rather than preserving it for maintenance of their own lifestyles and health care.

In this way calls by retirees upon support from Centrelink should be minimised and deferred.