Pauline Hanson lashes Jim Chalmers over One Nation super plan and says Labor ‘buggered the economy’

Pauline Hanson has accused Treasurer Jim Chalmers of acting “hysterically” over One Nation’s controversial superannuation proposal, telling him struggling Australians would not need the measure if Labor had not “so thoroughly buggered the economy”.

The One Nation leader fired back on Monday after Mr Chalmers warned the party’s plan would leave millions of Australians with less money and economic security in retirement.

“Jim Chalmers is acting hysterically over a proposal that would let someone struggling to pay their rent or mortgage keep 9% going into super instead of 12%, and take the 3% difference as a tax-effective pay boost for up to three years,” Senator Hanson wrote on X.

“Perhaps if you hadn’t so thoroughly buggered the economy, Jim, they wouldn’t need to.

“And there’s nothing more anti-worker than presiding over four years of falling real wages.”

Her intervention came after Mr Chalmers launched his own blistering attack on One Nation and warned Australians their retirement savings were at risk.

“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.”

The escalating political fight follows Barnaby Joyce declaring Australians “aren’t stupid” and should be trusted to decide whether to divert some of their superannuation contributions during periods of financial hardship.

Mr Joyce argued Australians doing it tough should have greater access to their money, 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”.

Under the One Nation proposal outlined by Senator Hanson, someone struggling to meet their rent or mortgage payments could temporarily reduce the amount of their income going into super from 12 per cent to nine per cent.

The remaining three percentage points could instead be taken as a “tax-effective pay boost” for up to three years.

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 diverting $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 the proposal was about making it easier for Australians facing financial pressure to access more of their money.

“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.”