The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has been questioned over the validity of handing $2.5 million of penalty money extracted from the Commonwealth Bank and ANZ to consumer group, the Superannuation Consumer Centre (SCC).
ASIC chair, James Shipton, confirmed the grant of the money to the SCC amid suggestions by the chairman of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services, Senator James Paterson that it was an “activist organisation” that he did not believe should be “funded by proxy with public money”.
The money was delivered to the SCC under so-called “community benefit’ arrangements where, if those harmed by misconduct, cannot be readily identified ASIC can select an organisation.
Amid a suggestion by ASIC executives that, perhaps, it was time to revisit the issue, the chair said: “In this instance, an activist group that purports to represent superannuants is not necessarily a good proxy for the superannuants themselves, who, as you say, are the victims of the action”.
NSW Liberal Senator, Andrew Bragg, asked whether, given the SCC already had the money, what sort of involvement or interest ASIC might have in its activities going forward.
Jim Chalmers has defended changes to the Future Fund’s mandate, referring to himself as a “big supporter” of the sovereign wealth fund, amid fierce opposition from the Coalition, which has pledged to reverse any changes if it wins next year’s election.
In a new review of the country’s largest fund, a research house says it’s well placed to deliver attractive returns despite challenges.
Chant West analysis suggests super could be well placed to deliver a double-digit result by the end of the calendar year.
Specific valuation decisions made by the $88 billion fund at the beginning of the pandemic were “not adequate for the deteriorating market conditions”, according to the prudential regulator.