Raising the retirement age - readers respond

File photo / Bay of Plenty Times

This week, the Retirement Commissioner recommended the age of entitlement for New Zealand Superannuation be raised from 65 to 67 to ensure it remains affordable over the long term, but Prime Minister John Key ruled out any change.

We asked readers their views on the proposed change and got a wide range of responses.

Display Name said the commissioner's recommendation was "absolutely right on the button. I am 65 now and don't feel I am anywhere near the age for retirement."

Digby Green agreed, saying: "There would be nothing wrong with a gradual increase to 67... Thirty years ago many men retired at 65 and died a few years afterwards. Now as I walk the streets I see lots and lots of old people. People are living till they are 80 or 90!"

James B also agreed: "When the retirement age of 60 years old was introduced the average life span was 62 years old, now it is 77 years old. The current is unsustainable... Key is wrong to bury his head in the sand on this issue. Australia has adopted a pragmatic approach and gradually raised the retirement age to 67. NZ should follow suit and gradually increase to 70 years over a 35 year period."

Others thought the age should be lifted immediately, not gradually from 2020 to 2033. "If it is going to happen, it should start now," said Sabyn.

"We didn't get ten years warning of student loans, we didn't get ten years warning that we would be in debt into our thirties and then have mortgages equivalent to five years full gross earnings just to get an ex-state house on a handkerchief sized section for our family to live in.

"Start now and increase it three months each year, so that 67 is a reality for everyone by 2013."

But some vehemently opposed the proposed change.

"No definitely not," said Raewyn Martin. "We might be living longer but not everyone is fit and well. Some people are struggling with health from their fifties."

Tonto was also opposed. "We live in an age where all are urged to Kiwisave or plan for retirement years, and when the age is pushed out further to 67, fewer will actually live to reach it and enjoy their nest eggs."

Mchaggis said: "Increasing the retirement age to 67 or beyond might be alright for pen pushers, but it's ridiculous to expect those in the emergency services for instance, or others engaged in hard physical work to carry on well into their senior years!"

Woof thought older people deserved government help far more than the young. "No it shouldn't. I think the Govt should focus more on reducing the benefits young people receive and the interest free student loans," he said.

"Who deserves a benefit more, a young person who can't be bothered to get a job or someone who has worked all their lives and paid taxes?"

- NZ Herald staff