Dan O'Brien

that you would give some tax incentive to the smaller people.

Obviously, you wouldn't make it open-ended because that means people would move, people with loads of money would move their money out of whatever their investments now where they pay capital gains into these.

That's not the purpose of this.

The purpose of this is to get more ordinary people who either don't feel it's worth saving because inflation erodes away the value of their savings or because they don't have easy, clear, simple options to put their money.

Well, that would be the hope, that people would have a range of options in terms of where their money is invested and that it's all as simple as possible and people would have a graded...

Rating one would be very low risk, but probably low return, something very close to a deposit.

But maybe up higher at rating eight, for example, you might want to put your money into the American stock market.

Now, that's probably over the years has always been a very good bet.

But as we know, stock markets go up and down.

you could find that six months after you invested, stock market's gone down and you've actually less money, but over the longer term.

But a lot of this is about sort of looking at this for what timeframe you want to invest.

If you're investing for your child, for example, and they're not going to be needing this money for maybe 20 years when they're looking for a deposit for a house, then it's much a better idea to put into higher return

Because it doesn't really matter if the stock market moves up and down for the next 10, 15, 20 years.

It's only at the time that the child will need the money that you'd be concerned about.

No, I don't agree with that.

I think depending on how you design it.

And I think countries like Sweden, for example, have been leaders in this.

Now, Sweden's about as social democratic a country as you can find.

And they have this for more than 10 years.

I think about a quarter of Swedes have one of these investment accounts.