Jim Chalmers warns One Nation and Coalition will ‘cut your super’ as Barnaby Joyce defends plan

Treasurer Jim Chalmers has launched a blistering attack on One Nation’s plan to make it easier for struggling Australians to access their superannuation, claiming any future Coalition government involving the minor party would “cut your super”.

The Treasurer weighed into the growing superannuation fight on Monday after Barnaby Joyce argued Australians “aren’t stupid” and should be trusted to decide whether to dip into their retirement savings during financial hardship.

“It’s now beyond doubt that any coalition government with One Nation in it will cut your super,” Mr Chalmers wrote on X.

“This means less money and less economic security for millions of Australians in retirement.

“One Nation, the Liberals and Nationals are all anti wage rises and anti super because they’re all anti worker.”

Mr Joyce earlier argued Australians doing it tough should have easier access to their retirement savings, particularly if they were struggling to pay rent or at risk of losing their home.

Australians can already access their superannuation early in limited circumstances, including severe financial hardship, but Mr Joyce argued the existing process was “extremely convoluted”.

His proposal would streamline the process and allow eligible Australians to access some of their ongoing super contributions while continuing to receive the compulsory 12 per cent contribution from their employer.

Mr Joyce also took aim at the tax applied when super is released early, arguing struggling Australians should not lose a chunk of money they desperately need.

Tanya Plibersek hit back at the proposal during a fiery exchange with Mr Joyce on Sunrise on Monday, warning Australians could pay a much bigger price when they eventually retire.

“Well, it’s obvious that One Nation wants you to raid your super instead of getting a pay increase,” she said.

“We support higher wages and better super when you retire.”

Host Natalie Barr put to Mr Joyce that withdrawing $6900 over three years while in your mid-20s could ultimately leave someone about $80,000 worse off by their 60s.

But Mr Joyce argued Australians were capable of weighing up the immediate and long-term consequences themselves.

“I think people are competent enough to work that out for themselves,” he said.

“People aren’t stupid. We give them credit for more brains than the Labor Party does.”

He argued losing a home could have far greater financial consequences than sacrificing some future retirement savings.

“If I lose my house now, I’m going to be hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars out,” he said.

Mr Joyce described owning a home as one of the most important assets a person could have heading into retirement.

The debate became increasingly tangled over existing hardship provisions, with Ms Plibersek pointing out Australians could already apply for early access to super.

Mr Joyce maintained his proposal was about making that process easier and reducing the tax burden.

“We know that if you raid your super now, you’ll be thousands of dollars worse off in retirement,” Ms Plibersek said.

“We want people to retire with dignity.”