Disclosure changes open door for ‘reckless behaviour’

10 June 2021
| By Laura Dew |
image
image
expand image

The Australian Council of Superannuation Investors (ACSI) believes proposed changes to disclosure measures under Schedule 2 of the Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No.1) Bill are unwarranted.

Speaking at the public hearing of the Senate Estimates, Kate Griffiths, executive manager for public policy and advocacy, and Ed John, executive manager for governance and engagement, said ACSI members invested $200 billion in Australian equities.

The changes proposed under Schedule 2 of the bill related to continuous disclosure obligations and ACSI said it did not see any existing problems with current disclosure measures that would necessitate the changes outlined in Schedule 2.

Griffiths said: “We have had a fair and transparent market under existing laws for many years where companies are incentivised to ensure material information is disclosed in a timely manner. It is not overly burdensome for firm to establish appropriate disclosure systems and there is ample guidance from Australian Securities and Investment Commission [ASIC] and the ASX on how to manage disclosure responsibilities”.

She described how the proposed changes equated to a “watering down” of the current standards and said ACSI was concerned what would happen to market integrity.

“We are concerned Schedule 2 will undermine the integrity of the market, with a weaker test the level of information disclosed to the market will deteriorate.

“The current measures encourage people to be more transparent than less but when it changes, there is less incentive to come down on the side of disclosing something. That is our concern,” said Griffiths.

“The difficulty with the changes is the potential effect on the integrity and trust in the market. We have had standards for some that time that set a high bar and that facilitate efficient working of the market. In these changes, they call into question the efficiency and trust of the market so I think there are issues.”

John said that the change in standards could be a “green light” for reckless behaviour from businesses superannuation funds could invest in.

“It could give a green light for more reckless practice and have a significant effect on behaviour. [Currently] what is published is true and can be relied upon but if there is less of a feeling that these obligations are as strong as they have been in the past decade then that is a concern.”

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest developments in Super Review! Anytime, Anywhere!

Grant Banner

From my perspective, 40- 50% of people are likely going to be deeply unhappy about how long they actually live. ...

1 year 3 months ago
Kevin Gorman

Super director remuneration ...

1 year 3 months ago
Anthony Asher

No doubt true, but most of it is still because over 45’s have been upgrading their houses with 30 year mortgages. Money ...

1 year 3 months ago

Governor Bullock took a more hawkish stance on Tuesday, raising concerns over Trump’s escalating tariffs, which sent economists in different directions with their predict...

14 hours ago

Equity Trustees has announced the appointment of Jocelyn Furlan to the Superannuation Limited (ETSL) and HTFS Nominees Pty Ltd (HTFS) boards, which have oversight of one ...

14 hours ago

Following growing criticism of the superannuation industry’s influence on capital markets and its increasing exposure to private assets, as well as regulators’ concerns a...

14 hours 30 minutes ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS