Australia's peak superannuation body has called on the country's newly elected Federal MPs to stop politicking and make some decisions on the future of the superannuation system.

While Labor has indicated it is not that far away from supporting the Government's planned changes to superannuation, in-fighting in the Coalition could be the biggest obstacle.

The head of the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia, Pauline Vamos, said that sort of behaviour is not good enough.

"It's time for the political debates to stop. Let's get back to work. Both parties are so close when it comes to superannuation policy," she said.

With significant change on the table, it is expected there will be winners and losers.

"Nine out of 10 are incredibly irate and angry that their retirement plans have been trashed by these changes in the budget and I have no doubt at all there has been a significant effect on voting intentions," said Graeme Bottrill, a self-funded retiree and head of the Australian Investors Association.

He said the ballot box was a chance for the losers to have their voices heard.

Costello changes saw 'rivers of gold'

Former Liberal treasurer Peter Costello a decade ago unleashed the rivers of gold for wealthy retirees, describing them as "the biggest reform to superannuation that Australia has even seen".

They included once-off after tax super contributions of $1 million and then annual after tax limits which, by the time of this year's budget, still allowed $720,000 to be put in, almost in one hit.

Peter Costello described his superannuation reforms as the biggest "Australia had ever seen". ( Alan Porritt, file photo: AAP )

Mr Costello's coup de gras for the rich was no tax on super fund earnings and no tax on super fund payments in retirement once someone turned 60.

This was something which raised eyebrows, Mr Bottrill said, even though retirees were very grateful.

"I think most sensible fair-minded people would view the Costello changes in 2006 were too generous," he said.

But how those changes are being wound back has angered wealthier people who are at or near retirement — even though retirees will still get preferential treatment.

The Government is proposing to limit superannuation pension fund balances to $1.6 million.

At an annual return of 5 per cent that would pay a tax free income of $80,000.

By comparison, a 40-year-old single income earner on $80,000 a year, with two children, paying off a mortgage and the other costs of raising a family, would pay tax of $19,000.

Labor's tax free super threshold is $75,000 a year — an income level which would see that 40-year-old worker pay $17,500 in tax.

"With term deposits and bank deposits the interest rate begins with a two not a five, so the argument that $1.6 million provides you with retirement instead of the age pension is completely spurious," Mr Bottrill said.

A lifetime cap of $500,000 on after tax contributions

But the most contentious part of the Government's superannuation changes is the lifetime cap of $500,000 on after tax contributions — backdated to 2007.

It is not just Labor which is opposed to it.

Many Government MP's also have their doubts after feeling the heat from retirees in their electorates.

But with the majority of people never having the chance to put an extra $500,000 into their super funds, ASFA's Pauline Vamos, has only limited sympathy for those who feel they have been badly treated.

"In terms of the $500,000 there's 80,000 people that are impacted, compared to say 3 million people that get the benefit of the low-income rebate," Ms Vamos said.

ASFA said the proposed changes to superannuation will still provide for a comfortable retirement.

However with so much angst in the community from those whose plans have been disrupted, and with the election result so tight, many Coalition politicians in particular are very nervous about further alienating voters.