That's a headline from the NBR, March 27. The NZ Initiative has helpfully circulated the article in its weekly newsletter.
His comments explain why he backs the PM's promise not to raise the age of Super qualification.
Not very well.
There are costs and associated behaviour that can be changed. He uses the example of inter-generational welfare dependence. National is making those costs its focus.
Ageing, on the other hand is a fact.It's an unavoidable demographic change. So the PM made his promise and ensured National could avoid, "wasting any time in retirement commissions ...or arguing retirement policy".
That's a cop-out. All National need do, to save billions that could be spent on the increasing costs of aged healthcare (thus avoiding raising tax on the general population) is make raising the age of entitlement an election policy. There are policies being implemented in the US, the UK and Australia which provide a policy framework basis.
Then they get a mandate by winning the election.