Labour Says Your Boss Would Pay More Into KiwiSaver

Labour would make bosses pay 6 percent into KiwiSaver if it wins the election. That promise is the main part of its plan for retirement saving RNZ.

KiwiSaver is the savings account many New Zealanders use for retirement. Money from your pay goes in, and your boss adds money too. Think of it like a jar set aside for later life.

You would not have to pay more yourself. Labour said it kept worker payments voluntary to help people with the cost of living. Bosses would pay more. Workers would not have to.

Labour set out the plan in a release titled "Labour will strengthen KiwiSaver for future generations" Labour. It says the plan will make KiwiSaver work harder for more New Zealanders, helping people save, build wealth and retire with security.

The plan started an argument over who had the idea first. Finance Minister Nicola Willis called Labour's policy a "watered-down" version of National's policy. National shared its own KiwiSaver plan in June. Labour disagrees with that description.

Simplicity KiwiSaver boss Sam Stubbs commented on the timing. He said National had "ankle-tapped" Labour on KiwiSaver policy. Both big parties now say they lead on the change.

Labour also won support from Anne Collins, the wife of Sir Michael Cullen. She called the policy a "perfect solution" and said she was "absolutely delighted" with it. Cullen set up KiwiSaver.

There are also questions about fees. Stuff reported in August that KiwiSaver managers earned $1.2 billion in fees this year Stuff. Labour has talked about making the scheme work harder.

The broader context for the election is a small gap. Neither party would force workers to pay more. Both focus on bosses paying more. The practical questions are how fast the higher rate would come in, how bosses would factor it into pay and jobs, and whether voters see voluntary payments as help now or slower saving.

In my view, the words matter as much as the numbers. National claims Labour copied it. Labour points to its link to Cullen. Labour uses the cost of living to explain why it will not force workers to pay more, while still lifting savings through bosses. That message is likely to go down well with small test groups of voters, but economists and funds who want higher total savings will ask tougher questions.