Superannuation boards need to be held to account.
“Superannuation sector says the prudential regulator should stick to measuring funds’ success by their returns instead of caving to “bastardised political interference” in governance and performance testing.
Launching a vehement defence of industry funds’ controversial governance model.
Mr Weaven said the structure where boards are cherry-picked by unions and employer groups was the “secret sauce” to their outperformance even if the Coalition and listed financial services companies wished otherwise.
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Well well well. In the last sitting of parliament I asked the Labor party if members of Superannuation funds should be able to elect their board members.
As usual I got a non answer but now the rent seeking parasites in the superannuation industry have come out arguing that board members should be cherry picked by unions and employer groups.
Furthermore this particular parasite then has a crack at political interference.
What an arrogant bastard. Superannuation only exists because of political interference. People are forced to give to superannuation funds because politicians made it law without ever seeking a mandate.
And now the parasites who siphon $30 billion a year don’t want to be held accountable via a democratic process of electing board members by members of the fund.
Under the policies to be released this week, PeopleFirstParty.au will make it mandatory for Superannuation Boards to be elected by the people rather than selected by the elites.
How hypocritical are these people. They are happy to mandate wage theft but refuse to hold elections to choose who and how your money is managed.
Senate on 19/09/2024
Questions Without Notice
Age Pension
Senator RENNICK (Queensland) (14:51): Capitalism only occurs when people manage their own capital. This excludes politicians, corporate executives and superannuation funds, who manage other people’s money. However, politicians and corporate boards are at least elected by taxpayers and shareholders. Do the boards of superannuation funds have to be elected by their members; if not, why not? Shouldn’t members get a say in who manages their money?
Senator GALLAGHER (Australian Capital Territory—Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Finance, Minister for Women, Manager of Government Business in the Senate and Vice-President of the Executive Council) (14:52): The superannuation legislation is clear around the governance arrangements for superannuation funds, and they are accountable to their members and they must act in the best interest of their members. That is a requirement of the legislation. There are very tight laws and governance arrangements through APRA that are there precisely for that reason.
Members of superannuation funds are not often the most engaged with what’s happening with their accounts. We would like to see more engagement of people, of course, with their superannuation arrangements, but the reality is that, certainly for large periods of people’s careers, they’re not, and therefore the laws and regulations and oversight of that industry are really important. I think the balance between APRA, the superannuation legislation and all of the other accountability mechanisms ensure the best interests of members are paramount.
