The Greens have a particular view about what the second objective means, and because it's political, it will constantly be redefined by politicians. The apparent arms length mechanism certainly won't work with governments like this one who have an opinion on everything and the vindictive capacity to enforce that opinion. In my view there are also questions about the validity of the assumptions about the rate of return. The credibility of the fund depends on it generating enough returns to make a difference. Neither has there been any discussion about risk.
Politicians are notoriously optimistic about risks and the superfund is no exception.
Everyone else in the developed world will be liquidating assets when this fund does the same for the same reasons, a cash hungry older population. Risks, which are everyday events for individuals and companies, can become unmanageable for politicians if the public perceive their security in retirement is threatened. The legislation can't replace political consensus, even if it can slow down the process of change. National has looked hard at the scheme, and we acknowledge also the thorough work done by the Greens on examining the scheme. The harder we have looked, the more problems there seem to be.