If I hear another government minister say they're doing something for the ‘hard working families of Great Britain', I think I'm going to retch.
And at the risk of being sick, pretend for a moment that the ‘Australian' pension model resembles a Cherry Bakewell Tart. It has a bucket shaped pastry case filled with jam and sponge, which is then covered with icing, with a cherry popped on the top.
Well, Osborne has just tossed you the cherry.
And while you're focusing on that, he wants to grab the biggest slice of your pension cake that he can. George wants you to take your cake, and to eat it - but from what I see, there are relatively few cakes, and they're generally quite small.
And that's the difference between the Australians and us - they've all been baking cakes since 1992, and we haven't - well not many of us. We've had the ingredients, but nobody's pushed us into the kitchen.
And here's something else - the Australians are still only 22 years into this social experiment. Along the way they've experienced almost continuous economic growth, and they largely avoided the credit crunch meltdown. Their property market hasn't collapsed, they opted out of recession, and don't have lousy interest rates. Do you think that might have made a difference?
Cherry on top
Here in the UK George tosses everyone a cherry. We all know sweet sugary things help the medicine go down, but our government doesn't have the ‘cojones' to deliver the medicine. They're happier just doling out sugar (well, it is an election year next year) and, as we well know, too much sugar is bad for you.
And what about other countries that supposedly offer unrestricted access to pension pots at retirement? Dig deeper and you'll find that some of these pensions look remarkably like Individual Savings Accounts - no tax write offs on the way in, tax free growth, and lump sum access at retirement. Well, we've had those for decades, but there aren't that many pots that would support someone's retirement needs.
So, restricted access or not, too few people save for retirement - and that's the real issue here. I'm not saying greater access to pension pot isn't welcome, but on it's own it's the wrong thing to do - compulsory pension saving is the priority.
And if Osborne really wants to shake up pensions, he would remove the 55% tax charge on death. Instead of levying a swingeing tax, the money could fund pensions of successive generations instead.
Osborne might be a wizard, but the wizard of Oz? He's not.
Dennis Hall is chief executive of Yellowtail Financial Planning
Smoking biggest culprit; obesity second
Average earner will gain £840 in 2018
Will also move heritage items
Responding to letter from Treasury Committee chair Nicky Morgan