Super trustees need better vigilance: APRABY EMMA RAPAPORT | MONDAY, 27 MAR 2017 12:43PM![]() APRA's deputy chair Helen Rowell hit out at superannuation trustees who incur "inappropriate expenditures" saying that unnecessary costs negatively affect outcomes for members. Related News |
Editor's Choice
ASIC to take 'balanced' stance on super advertising ban rules
The corporate regulator said it promises to take a "balanced" approach to enforcing new rules around any advertising of superannuation funds during the employee onboarding process, which take effect in a few weeks.
BlackRock expands active ETF range
BlackRock is set to expand its Australian ETF range with the launch of the iShares World Equity High Income Complex ETF (ASX: WYNC), an actively managed strategy targeting investors seeking both income and broad global equity exposure.
T. Rowe Price names head of intermediary for Australia
T. Rowe Price has appointed a head of intermediary for Australia, following a three-month absence in the role after Jonathan Ross' departure in March.
FEATURE | Aged care: The longevity dividend
It's not just Australia that is dealing with an aging population, in fact the World Health Organisation estimates by 2030, one in six people will be aged 60 years or over.
Products
Featured Profile

Brian Redican
CHIEF ECONOMIST
NEW SOUTH WALES TREASURY CORPORATION
NEW SOUTH WALES TREASURY CORPORATION
What makes an economist an economist? TCorp chief economist Brian Redican reflects on over three decades of navigating Australia's economic cycles. Riddhima Talwani writes.








The issue I see is APRA's interpretation of what makes a person independent because each person will have a past history which will influence their decision-making processes. We all carry some baggage from our past whether we come from the employer or employee side, so can anyone be truly independent?
Surely it should be about what skills and abilities a person has rather than are they are 'independent'. By adding independent trustees to the board aren't we just adding to the cost, yet APRA also say that's a major issue? So which is it?
The decision to merge or close a fund should sit with the members and in fact it does. If a member is unhappy they can move to another Fund or is APRA saying members do not understand?
If that's the case why not spend money educating Australians of their rights instead of lecturing funds that they should make the decision without even consulting their members?