Some winners and some losers, but vast majority of pensioners might ask ‘What happened?’

Very disappointed on reading the changes, I agree with Wendy from NSW. I also think that our government gives too much aid overseas and does not care enough about our senior pensioners. I am concerned that the amount we have saved for our old age instead of squandering on a lavish lifestyle is being eaten up by low interest rates and taxes. 

Nothing new here - all available via the media. 

You don't say much about Veterans and payments for Hearing Loss etc....and Pensions from DVA and as applicable to some of us who are 91 years old......I know we are few....but are we no longer important? 

I feel if you can afford to not have the pension, it is a good move bygovernment. We have charities stretched to the limit, not many want to support charities,so this is one way of lifting some of their burden. Pensions were introduced for those who through not fault of their own have to be supported by government. sincerely Dorothy 

On reading many of the comments from members I would have to agree with mmany of them and particularly those that made the comment re our prime minister and other politicians and their benefits. I feel that like all those who are working when they have finished their term of office they should receive what everyone else receives not flights overseas and domestic, office space, driver etc etc many of them leave office and go onto other work but they are still getting the benefits that they had in public office , none of our parlimentarians will take a cut in their pensions or benefits but they expect the general working populace to accept them. Very unfair 

Since retiring we have had to go on a full pension however the small amount of money we had saved away has been eroded away un til there is nothing left The interest on savings is just so low its not worth having basically. I do agree that those who have good assets should lose part pension but be still eligible to the commonwealthhealth card Had we still been working we would have expoected to pay our way as we always did however i must say that even those who rely on their monetary assets to get by will not have them for long unless something happens with the interest rates on savings. 

I am on a part pension and have to fill in an income and assets form twice a year. I know people who have been on a pension for over twenty years and never get asked to fill in any forms. Shouldn't rules apply to every person who receives benefits, as there must be thousands who have have accumulated funds that and are never asked to update their information . As usual the honest carry the dishonest. 

We who have worked and saved all our life, must now spend all of that hard saved money to support the drinker, gamblers, and spongers who have relied on us for money all our working life. nothing changes joan qld 

My husband and myself have been on the old age pension for quite some years now and, in fact, should be eligible for a full pension, however, in spite of well and truly meeting the current asset test, they only give us a part pension because of the funds we get from our Allocated Pension each month which they deem as being "Income". My husband had very little by way of Superannuation as it wasn't available for a great deal of his working life. All of the Superannuation plus the vast majority of our life savings, thinking we were doing the best for our future, and, I might add on recommendation from a Financial Planner, we put into our Allocation Pensions. Obviously all of the money we put in there had, at the time of earning same, been Taxed as it was Income. Unfortunately, like so many others of our age, a great deal of our money was lost in the Financial crash. So, here we find ourselves being penalised, yet again, for trying to ensure comfort and security in our old age. It's quite annoying to find that the likes of our PM and Treasurer and other Politicians, both current and past, never mention reducing or changing the rules for their pensions when they get booted out, lose office or retire. Jan 

The over 55s have enormous voting power if they could only remove their blinkers and closly look at the policies of the current major parties. Neither considers us important. The only way we could create a meaningful voice is to start a political party and to start with target the senate. Look at what has happened with the change of government in Victoria a budget that provides a feeding frenzy for the unions and public service. On the federal front the alternative is to reintroduce carbon tax to make our industry even less competitive and havr low income people unable to afford the basic necessity of heating and cooling. The rate cut from the Reserve Bank was 2.5% the NAB has reduced the interest payable on my account by 3%. Welfare seems to be directed to those who should not need it. Childcare should be means tested if a couple are earning greater than $200, 000 why should they be supported. What assets test do they have? In determining income are investment losses included? Lets be fair if you deliberately incur losses to reduce taxable income those losses should be ignored in establishing income for entitlements. Also why are investment losses 100% deductible wheras capital gains on disposal of the asset are based on 50% pf the gain. Strikes me that retirees are a soft target.