The super industry's efforts to resolve the baby boomer bubble has focused too much on asset allocation and product solutions rather than holistic solutions that start with advice and members' cashflow considerations.
Colonial First State senior executives said there had been an over-focus on developing a "silver bullet" to resolve the looming demographic challenge, when real solutions started with accessible and affordable advice.
Peter Chun, Colonial's general manager of product and investments, said retirees gravitated around their bank account and wanted the superannuation industry to provide flexible ways to manage their cashflow in retirement.
"I think industry has thought we'll build this great mousetrap," Chun said.
Cashflow considerations such as the minimum pension amount and the implications of aged care needed to be nutted out, they said.
Linda Elkins Colonial's executive general manager said banks could do more to support Australia's superannuation industry, as demographics changed, through their breadth of services.
"We are in a good position to listen to the voice of the customer," she said.
But legislative changes were needed to promote the development of suitable product solutions, according to Elkins.
Product was the final consideration in providing a retirement solution, Chun said. He said an allocated pension could provide the strong bedrock from which to manage member's cashflows.
It was more flexible and could be integrated with online banking compared to lifetime annuities, which were locked in and capital intensive, he said.
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.