ASIC’s double-edged super fund expenditure scrutiny
Superannuation funds not only have to justify their expenditures as being in the best interests of members but must also now face having to explain to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) why they did not spend money.
ASIC chair, Joe Longo has said that superannuation funds can expect questioning from the regulator if they fail to appropriately invest in data, systems and processes that would deliver better service and responsiveness to members.
Further, he has suggested that ASIC will leverage the government’s proposed mandatory and enforceable service standards.
At the same time as restating ASIC’s concerns around the handling of members’ death benefits, Longo told a Sydney conference that the failings of superannuation funds had govern rise to questions about the level of their investment.
“Sometimes we hear from funds that further investment in data, systems, and processes is too costly or too difficult. For example, one trustee has delayed investing in a better workflow tracking and reporting capability for close to three years – even after external advice identified deficiencies. The new capability was needed to improve a critical member service,” he said.
“But the risks of not investing are just too great. It’s in the interest of all Australians to have well-run, resilient superannuation funds. So let me be clear on this point – ASIC isn’t going to question critical investments in data, systems, and processes that are essential to the delivery of member services.
“But you can expect we’ll question their absence,” Longo said.
“All this points to the cold hard truth that super trustees have to get a grip on their data, systems, and processes. They have to know what’s going on in their own business.”
Longo said that to the extent that some trustees are not across the data, systems and processes of their funds, they are failing to live up to their responsibilities to act in the best interests of their members.
How about less $ on ‘compare the pair’ and just provide better member service? (outlandish I know!)..
Are our regulators crossing into murky territory by increasingly second guessing trustee decision-making when it comes to investing capital and deploying resourcing? Shadow trusteeship is something to be avoided, and that includes by regulators too.
The regulators / industry super funds best buddies should be doing far more than guessing about the ISF corporate sporting boxes for the Union & Bikie bosses pleasure. And all the related party “services” these same Union & Bikie bosses benefit from via ISF preferential use.
Big Government in action. Perhaps the Government should just run everything themselves. Although, as it didn’t work so well for the USSR, perhaps ASIC and APRA should just be defunded.
Obviously this won’t apply to their mates in the union funds.
I’m afraid that on the evidence, Apra and ASIC are all hat, no cattle, when it comes to Industry superfunds
Watched a game of NRL featuring the Titans over the weekend. Coming to you from Cbus Super stadium
Love to see the figures at advertising on TV at the moment, because Aware Super is starting to become as frequent on our TV screens as Hardly Normal. And Jerry negotiates big discounts
How can any of this rubbish be seen as being of benefit to members
Their defense will be almost certainly be that if they attract more members, then the economies of scale will reduce administration fees.
But that’s ok… it’s all well and good to take on new members but if you can’t service them, then you have tomorrow’s problem.
The opportunity to take on someone and disappoint is better than no having a client at all.
Where the gremlins lie are in the related party areas. But that’s a story for tomorrow.
(I.e. if you own an office building, who provided the flowers, who cut the grass, who maintained the building?) Who are they, why were they picked?
That there would be a really great deep dive.
Industry Super funds are as follows;
Note we’ve moved to a 4 day a week, and staff members working from home need to log on to Microsoft teams at least 2 hours a day.
Spot on boss
sad but so true
Mega millions being spent in order to Sponsors footy teams & naming right to Stadiums!
Well that appears to be in the member’s “Best Interest”…. Nothing to see here!
Just remember people the first act of the Former Minister Stephen Jones after he was elected.
He wanted to arguably reduce transparency and accountability of super fund trustee spending.
The ALP – party of accountability and transparency right?
Stop messing about. We’re too nice. We are at war.
Here’s a thought, I’d rather pay my CLSR fee to someone to run a campaign against the ALP.
If everyone else did the same, that’d be a rather excellent fighting fund.