If ever there is a time that most politicians like to avoid a meaningful conversation on superannuation policy, it's an election year.

Superannuation is a third rail of Kiwi politics - touch it and you die. Former Prime Minister Jim Bolger found that out in the 90s over the surcharge and, more recently, Labour got flogged on the issue at the last election.

But with its costs set to rise from around $12 billion last year to almost $15 billion in 2020, and Treasury forecasting its costs as a percentage of GDP could almost double by 2060, the debate over the scheme's sustainability remains as fierce as ever.

The Prime Minister and the Finance Minister have both said superannuation will be looked at, though in January Steven Joyce was at pains to say there'd be no big or dramatic changes.

So while the Government's not ruling out change, it's certainly not ruling it in ether. Rather what Bill English is doing is avoiding being backed into a corner the way his predecessor was and is leaving himself enough wiggle room should he need it down the track.

The Government's position has largely been the scheme remains affordable under current economic settings and all the language seems to suggest there's almost zero appetite for change as far as the National Party's concerned.

The same argument could be said of the Labour Party too. It was burnt badly by its previous policy of raising the age of entitlement.

When you purport to represent blue collar workers, they get a little ticked off when you propose to make their life harder.

And as for New Zealand First and its vocal defence of the current scheme and its settings - well a cynic might suggest that has something to do with its core support and their interests (and this is likely also a factor for both Labour and National in their considerations too). I refer to the power that boomers hold at the polls. They're politically engaged and you mess with them at your peril if you're a politician seeking gains in an election year.

Of course the ACT Party does stand out somewhat in its position of demanding superannuation reform. But it's an easy position for it to take. When your backers are the well off that don't actually need the safety net of superannuation, it's easy to take the moral high ground.

Any changes to superannuation will require political will, but as long as political interests reign supreme any meaningful change looks a long way off yet.