The Superannuation Complaints Tribunal (SCT) should remain independent from Government and the regulators, according to Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) chief executive Pauline Vamos.
Speaking at a Super Review breakfast event this morning, Vamos said that while there was a regulatory gap in the case of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), the SCT as a consumer representative body should remain a separate entity.
Vamos said that between the Financial Ombudsman Service and the SCT, the dispute resolution process had become “murky” but that, despite a Senate enquiry, the process should not involve the regulators.
“I have a view that a dispute resolution process for consumers must be as independent as possible from the regulator - they’re different roles,” she said.
Vamos said however that the superannuation industry was required to adhere to the requirements of two regulatory bodies, which was not only onerous but included a lot of overlap.
Super funds had different disclosure requirements and paid multiple levies, creating duplication in the system which needed to be assessed.
Super funds had a “tremendous month” in November, according to new data.
Australia faces a decade of deficits, with the sum of deficits over the next four years expected to overshoot forecasts by $21.8 billion.
APRA has raised an alarm about gaps in how superannuation trustees are managing the risks associated with unlisted assets, after releasing the findings of its latest review.
Compared to how funds were allocated to March this year, industry super funds have slightly decreased their allocation to infrastructure in the six months to September – dropping from 11 per cent to 10.6 per cent, according to the latest APRA data.