Enshrining an objective for the system in the legislation was a major proposal from the Financial Services Inquiry in 2014, led by former Commonwealth Bank boss and ex-Future Fund chairman David Murray.

It said broad political agreement should be sought about the objectives of the system and recommended the government report publicly on how policy proposals affecting super were consistent with achieving this objective.

Loading

The Murray inquiry recommended this objective be to “provide income in retirement to substitute or supplement the age pension”.

Subsidiary objectives, which were to be introduced through regulation, included smoothing consumption over someone’s life, managing risks in retirement, alleviating fiscal pressure on the government, providing safeguards and investing in the best interests of fund members.

“David Murray warned us seven years ago that without a legislated objective for superannuation, the system would be undermined by constant chopping and changing,” Mr Jones said. “Since then, the government has used super as the answer to their policy failures in everything from housing to domestic violence and the cost of tertiary education.

Loading

“The purpose of superannuation is to provide financial security and a dignified standard of living for Australians in retirement.”

The superannuation industry has previously called for the government to legislate an objective for the system.

Labor’s push would revisit elements of legislation moved in 2016 by then financial services minister Kelly O’Dwyer. Ms O’Dwyer introduced legislation following the 2016-17 budget’s announcement that an objective would be made into law. This would have required all new bills and regulations relating to super to include a statement on how they were compatible with the objective of the system. The legislation did not progress any further.

Labor’s proposed objective is significantly different to that put forward by Ms O’Dwyer and the Murray inquiry.

Loading

It has the potential to inflame debate about how much is enough for a “dignified” retirement, which has been a major source of discussion during the fight over whether the superannuation guarantee should rise to 12 per cent by 2025 or remain at 9.5 per cent.

The Retirement Income Review released in late 2020, which found the current rate could be adequate provided balances were used more efficiently, recommended an objective be agreed on for the entire retirement system.

Superannuation Minister Jane Hume did not respond to requests for comment.