Australia’s super system was designed to be universal. Yet for many First Nations people, it has not delivered on its full promise.
While this diagnosis has been accepted for some time, the remedy hasn’t always been clear.
Our new report, A fair retirement: Removing barriers in super for First Nations peoples, launched this week provides a roadmap for industry, regulators and government to help uplift service standards and experiences for First Nations people.
It makes clear that while progress has been made, structural barriers remain embedded across the system.
First Nations people continue to earn significantly less on average in the workforce than non-Indigenous Australians, are more likely to have insecure jobs, and have lower lifetime super contributions as a result. And while the percentage of Australian workers covered by the nation’s super system has risen from 85% in 2002 to 92% in 2022, First Nations super coverage still isn’t equal, rising from 70% to 78% in the same timeframe.
Median super balances for non-Indigenous Australians and Culturally and Linguistically Diverse populations grew substantially to around $70,000 and $65,000 by 2022 respectively, while First Nations median balances were significantly lower, reaching only about $28,000 by 2022.
The report sets out six better‑practice principles for super funds, including leadership‑level commitment to cultural safety, empowering frontline staff to exercise discretion, and improving cultural capability training for boards and executives. These measures recognise that policy intent must translate into everyday member experiences. Community engagement, partnerships with First Nations organisations and coordinated, sector‑wide action are identified as essential to delivering lasting change.
It also identifies where government can play a role. Super law still relies on narrow definitions of family and dependency that do not reflect First Nations kinship systems. This can exclude culturally significant carers and family members from death benefit arrangements, creating distress and uncertainty at already difficult times. Legislative reform to recognise Indigenous kinship structures would provide clarity for funds and fairness for families.
Clearer regulatory guidance on non‑standard identification is also needed. Risk‑based, culturally sensitive approaches would allow funds to meet their obligations without defaulting to rigid rules that lock people out of their own savings.
As Australia’s super system matures, improving outcomes for First Nations Australians is not just a matter of inclusion — it is a test of whether super can truly fulfil its purpose as a universal retirement system.
